Searching \ for '[OT]: PIClist censorship' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: piclist.com/techref/microchip/devices.htm?key=pic
Search entire site for: 'PIClist censorship'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[OT]: PIClist censorship'
2005\03\17@095421 by olin_piclist

face picon face
Short info:

Your PIClist messages may be passed by censors and must be approved
before it is actually posted to the list.  This may be done without your
knowledge and you may receive no notification of a particular message
being disallowed by the censors.  A censored message can simply fail to
show up on the list, which you might or might not notice.  If you do,
you are left wondering what may have been wrong with your email client
or network connection at the time.

Long story:

Last October(?) the admins got upset at my pointing out how humerous it
was to suggest that a "54" in a date code represented the week within
the year (since years only have 52 weeks), and I was bumped off the
list.  After a lot of ruckus, James put me back on but said that my
posts would be passed thru censors for approval before being posted to
the list.  I did not find that acceptable, and only discussed list
issues.  I refused to "support" the PIClist by helping people or
otherwise providing value under these conditions.  After some more
discussion, James eventually agreed that I did not in fact break the
rules and said my posts would no longer be subjected to censorship.
Based on that, I started posting on technical topics again, helping
people with questions, etc.

I found out about a month ago that instead of removing censorship from
my posts, I was subjected to secret censorship.  My messages were still
being censored, even though I was told they wouldn't be.  In other
words, I was lied to.  I tried to have a reasoned discussion about this
with the admins. They first claimed that no promise was actually made,
and when I quoted the relevant snippet from the archives it was just
ignored.  I wasn't expecting an apology, but was hoping for a
gentlemanly discussion about the issues and ways to deal with them,
perhaps resulting in a resolution suitable to all. Instead the response
I got from James was roughly "up yours, in your face" (those weren't the
exact words, but that was the overall tone).

At the time I didn't make a fuss about it and quietly stopped helping
people with direct questions and jumped in only when I personally found
something interesting or otherwise felt I had something to gain.  I also
became more active on the Microchip web forum.

I am sending this message because of an incident last Sunday.  I got a
personal message from someone on the list asking about an IIC bus
problem.  There was nothing in the message that needed to be private or
was unique to me.  I get these kinds of messages occasionally.  Most of
the time I just delete them.  That is a near term expedient, but does
nothing to solve the overall problem.  This time I decided to respond,
maybe because it was Sunday and I was home and I wasn't trying to get
some work done.  I responded on the list using the [PIC] tag.  I
explained that I don't respond privately to messages that don't really
need to be private, and why. However I quoted the whole original
question so that others could jump in and answer if they felt like it,
which was why I used the [PIC] tag.

At the bottom I also mentioned that I don't answer these kinds of
questions anymore on the PIClist due to my posts being subjected to
censorship, and suggested that the question be posted to the Microchip
web forum instead. There was nothing rude or insulting in the post.
Unfortunately I don't think I have a copy of it anymore, certainly not
on the machine I am on right now.  At the time, it didn't occur to me to
keep a copy.

This message never made it to the list.  I received no bounce or mailer
error.  Other messages I sent within a few hours from the same machine
with the same setup did get posted.  I have meanwhile found that the
message was indeed silently deleted by a censor.

This leads to the question "why?".  I honestly believe this message
broke no rules previously stated on the PIClist.  I therefore conclude
that the message was rejected merely because the censors didn't like the
content. Perhaps they felt revelations of the facts would be embarassing
to them. Perhaps they don't want public discussion about their policies.
While the admins aren't obligated to listen to anything we say, their
policies should at least be consistent and open.

I believe all the facts presented here are correct, any personal
opinions or conclusions are clearly labeled as such, nobody is being
belittled, and it is tagged [OT].  I have temporarily enabled the [OT]
channel to participate in any following discussion about this matter.


*****************************************************************
Embed Inc, embedded system specialists in Littleton Massachusetts
(978) 742-9014, http://www.embedinc.com

2005\03\17@121914 by Dan Smith

face picon face
Response from the Admins regarding list moderation.

The vast majority of subscribers are not moderated.  The handful of
people that have been tagged for moderation are mainly new subscribers
who have yet to post and Olin.  Moderation was initiated to allow Olin
to participate on the list without us Admins having to kick him off
list periodically.  There is a time overhead in approving posts, but
it works out to be far less time consuming for the Admins than having
to deal with the aftermath of an 'Olin incident'.

James never said that Olin would not be censored.

Usually, if there is a problem with a post, we Admins would reject it
- ie the original sender would get an email notifying them that their
post had been rejected.  At the weekend, Olin tried to post a message
to the list that we felt was inappropriate.  Rather than wasting a
whole lot of time, the message was discarded.  The list had been
running quite smoothly for the last few months and we hoped to keep it
that way.  Having one subscriber creating the vast majority of
administrative overhead is not a good thing.

If Olin is happy to accept moderation until we feel he can post
directly to the list, then there is not a problem.  If Olin wants to
create a big fuss over this, we Admins don't have the time to invest
over and above normal list administration to deal with him.  In other
words, we would remove him from the list.

This may sound harsh, but this has been a recurring situation for too long now.

The Admins
Dan, Josh, James, Herbert

2005\03\17@124954 by Vlad

flavicon
face
On Thu, Mar 17, 2005 at 05:19:13PM +0000, Dan Smith wrote:
> Response from the Admins regarding list moderation.
>
> The vast majority of subscribers are not moderated.  The handful of
> people that have been tagged for moderation are mainly new subscribers
> who have yet to post and Olin.  Moderation was initiated to allow Olin
> to participate on the list without us Admins having to kick him off
> list periodically.  There is a time overhead in approving posts, but
> it works out to be far less time consuming for the Admins than having
> to deal with the aftermath of an 'Olin incident'.

May I ask what an 'Olin incident' is? (or if someone would care to explain
off-list)

I have only been on the PIClist for a couple of years and perhaps know
only half the story,  but Olin is one of the most helpful members of
the PIClist community and the Microchip web forums.  Censoring him
would be a disservice to the list and certainly diminish the quality of
discussion here.

Thank you
-v

2005\03\17@142050 by Richard.Prosser

flavicon
face

I have to say I don't like the idea of censorship, I find un-notified
censorship even more disturbing.
While I can see there may be some need for moderating new members, any
posts that are blocked, should, in my opinion, at least be dignified by a
brief note as to the action taken and preferably an indication as to why.
Now we all know at least some of the background to Olin's censorship
problem, but the  actual contents of his latest blocked item are really
only known to him and a list admin, so the actual amount of distress it may
have caused to an "innocent" cannot be judged.  I think people do really
need to develop somewhat thicker skins and pro-activly protecting them is
not going to improve the situation.
On the other hand, the list admins do a pretty thankless job and I can
understand that they must get just as annoyed at having to censor Olin's
mails as Olin gets from his unsolicited emails.
Obviously there is no easy answer. My preference would be to only moderate
new members for a limited time and where posts are blocked the sender
should always be notified. Long term members could be suspended (or banned
in extreme cases) but I just don't like the idea of "undercover" censorship
for anyone.

And Olin, I also think that errors (including errors in protocol) should
not be criticised too harshly. Deliberate provocation is a different matter
again.

Just my 2c worth - I couldn't resist the rare apperance of Olin on OT!

Richard P






Short info:

Your PIClist messages may be passed by censors and must be approved
before it is actually posted to the list.  This may be done without your
knowledge and you may receive no notification of a particular message
being disallowed by the censors.  A censored message can simply fail to
show up on the list, which you might or might not notice.  If you do,
you are left wondering what may have been wrong with your email client
or network connection at the time.

Long story:

Last October(?) the admins got upset at my pointing out how humerous it
was to suggest that a "54" in a date code represented the week within
the year (since years only have 52 weeks), and I was bumped off the
list.  After a lot of ruckus, James put me back on but said that my
posts would be passed thru censors for approval before being posted to
the list.  I did not find that acceptable, and only discussed list
issues.  I refused to "support" the PIClist by helping people or
otherwise providing value under these conditions.  After some more
discussion, James eventually agreed that I did not in fact break the
rules and said my posts would no longer be subjected to censorship.
Based on that, I started posting on technical topics again, helping
people with questions, etc.

I found out about a month ago that instead of removing censorship from
my posts, I was subjected to secret censorship.  My messages were still
being censored, even though I was told they wouldn't be.  In other
words, I was lied to.  I tried to have a reasoned discussion about this
with the admins. They first claimed that no promise was actually made,
and when I quoted the relevant snippet from the archives it was just
ignored.  I wasn't expecting an apology, but was hoping for a
gentlemanly discussion about the issues and ways to deal with them,
perhaps resulting in a resolution suitable to all. Instead the response
I got from James was roughly "up yours, in your face" (those weren't the
exact words, but that was the overall tone).

At the time I didn't make a fuss about it and quietly stopped helping
people with direct questions and jumped in only when I personally found
something interesting or otherwise felt I had something to gain.  I also
became more active on the Microchip web forum.

I am sending this message because of an incident last Sunday.  I got a
personal message from someone on the list asking about an IIC bus
problem.  There was nothing in the message that needed to be private or
was unique to me.  I get these kinds of messages occasionally.  Most of
the time I just delete them.  That is a near term expedient, but does
nothing to solve the overall problem.  This time I decided to respond,
maybe because it was Sunday and I was home and I wasn't trying to get
some work done.  I responded on the list using the [PIC] tag.  I
explained that I don't respond privately to messages that don't really
need to be private, and why. However I quoted the whole original
question so that others could jump in and answer if they felt like it,
which was why I used the [PIC] tag.

At the bottom I also mentioned that I don't answer these kinds of
questions anymore on the PIClist due to my posts being subjected to
censorship, and suggested that the question be posted to the Microchip
web forum instead. There was nothing rude or insulting in the post.
Unfortunately I don't think I have a copy of it anymore, certainly not
on the machine I am on right now.  At the time, it didn't occur to me to
keep a copy.

This message never made it to the list.  I received no bounce or mailer
error.  Other messages I sent within a few hours from the same machine
with the same setup did get posted.  I have meanwhile found that the
message was indeed silently deleted by a censor.

This leads to the question "why?".  I honestly believe this message
broke no rules previously stated on the PIClist.  I therefore conclude
that the message was rejected merely because the censors didn't like the
content. Perhaps they felt revelations of the facts would be embarassing
to them. Perhaps they don't want public discussion about their policies.
While the admins aren't obligated to listen to anything we say, their
policies should at least be consistent and open.

I believe all the facts presented here are correct, any personal
opinions or conclusions are clearly labeled as such, nobody is being
belittled, and it is tagged [OT].  I have temporarily enabled the [OT]
channel to participate in any following discussion about this matter.


*****************************************************************
Embed Inc, embedded system specialists in Littleton Massachusetts
(978) 742-9014, http://www.embedinc.com

2005\03\17@143359 by olin_piclist

face picon face
Dan Smith wrote:
> The vast majority of subscribers are not moderated.  The handful of
> people that have been tagged for moderation are mainly new subscribers
> who have yet to post and Olin.  Moderation was initiated to allow Olin
> to participate on the list without us Admins having to kick him off
> list periodically.  There is a time overhead in approving posts, but
> it works out to be far less time consuming for the Admins than having
> to deal with the aftermath of an 'Olin incident'.

Moderation does take some time, and is a pretty onorous thing to do if you
think about it.  Also, the only "Olin incident" in over a year even by your
reckoning was last October regarding "week 54" as I described earlier.  If
you look in the logs, the thing that caused so much traffic was not my post
directly, but the response to my getting kicked off the list because many
considered it unfair.

Despite what some of you seem to think, I really do appreciate the work the
admins are doing in providing this list.  I don't think anyone here,
including myself, wants to see more trouble made for the admins.

So in hind sight, what mechanism would have resulted in the least work for
admins and minimum pissed off people?  Yes, moderation would have avoided
the whole incident, but it has a high ongoing cost, both in actual work and
ethically.  I think kicking me off the list for a week or so would have been
less work and frustration all around.  If you can only get kicked off
forever, then there will be upset people and objections.  Since temporary
situations fix themselves, nobody is going to get too worked up about them.
I know I would have accepted it quietly.

> James never said that Olin would not be censored.

On 18 October 2004 James wrote:

   Just don't publicly humiliate anyone else and I won't feel the
   need to do anything, much less remove or moderate you or do
   anything else that might be painfull for either of us.

I had apologized for my comment, and James seemed to be willing to let
bygones be bygones.  I don't know how else to interpret that statement other
than I was being removed from moderation.  I was happy to let this be a
bygone too, and started posting and providing technical help without
incident, something I had refused to do while being censored.  I interpreted
this as we had a deal.  James was giving me respect and removed me from
moderation, and I would be extra careful about not appearing to insult
people, implying they were stupid, or asking if mommy knew they were playing
with the 'puter again ;-).

> At the weekend, Olin tried to post a message
> to the list that we felt was inappropriate.  Rather than wasting a
> whole lot of time, the message was discarded.

But the problem is that there was nothing insulting or otherwise against any
rules of PIClist conduct in that post.  It was deleted only because I was
pointing out that I was being subjected to sensorship despite what I
perceived as a promise not to.

> If Olin is happy to accept moderation until we feel he can post
> directly to the list, then there is not a problem.

So what does it take?  I've probably posted around a thousand messages since
October.  How do we get past this?

No, I'm not "happy" to accept moderation, especially since I thought I was
promised it would stop.  I feel this is ethically wrong, especially when the
moderators cull messages just because they don't like them even though all
rules are observed.  As long as my messages are being censored, I will
refrain from providing "value" to the PIClist by providing technical help or
whatever.  I will jump into conversations only when I find it interesting,
entertaining, or have something to gain.  I realize this won't make much of
a difference to the PIClist, but it's my small way of protesting being
treated this way.

Is this *really* necessary?


*****************************************************************
Embed Inc, embedded system specialists in Littleton Massachusetts
(978) 742-9014, http://www.embedinc.com

2005\03\17@145309 by James Newton, Host

face picon face

> May I ask what an 'Olin incident' is? (or if someone would
> care to explain
> off-list)

Just trying to be polite and not be specific on the list about issues we
have had with some of what Olin has posted. I don't want to go into it, but
I guess I can say that sometimes other people (not Olin) have reacted very
negatively to the way Olin has said things. They have expressed that they
felt insulted by the words he used.

In the same situation, your opinion may have been that they needed to be a
bit more "thick skinned"

Or you may have felt that they were being called names or being "verbally
abused"

As list owner, I don't really care one way or the other, but the EFFECT was
that lots of discussion took place, a few people left the list, nobody
learned anything (as far as I could tell). Keeping the maximum number of
people on the list is one of our goals. The more people on the list, the
larger the base of information available and the better the chance that
questions will be answered and, equally important, that more questions will
be asked.

In a few cases, it has been deemed less damaging to remove one member than
to have several members leave. Even a valuable member. Even Olin.

Moderation was an alternative to direct removal that we hoped would allow us
to "keep the good" and "leave the bad behind" and I think for that, it has
worked to some degree. It's effectiveness is open to debate. But I would
really like to see the debate held, get it over with, decide what to do, and
then not discuss it again.

---
James Newton: PICList webmaster/Admin
spam_OUTjamesnewtonTakeThisOuTspampiclist.com  1-619-652-0593 phone
http://www.piclist.com/member/JMN-EFP-786
PIC/PICList FAQ: http://www.piclist.com



2005\03\17@145554 by James Newton, Host

face picon face
Just a few points:

1. Most members are NOT censored. Only newbie's and Olin (right?)

2. I never directly said Olin would not be censored.

3. Most of the time we reject message rather than drop them. Olin is the
exception because we got tired of arguing with him.

4. Olin has always been welcomed to start his own list and manage it how he
likes. I think he has the necessary resources to do so. I will be more than
happy to help in any way I can. Seriously.

Our concern with allowing that post is that it will generate a bunch of
discussion and lead to nothing good. But maybe it will, who knows. I don't
care if people think I'm (we're) doing a bad job... They can stay or leave
as they like. If the list was only 10 people it would be easier to manage
<GRIN> but I think most people are pretty happy and I know we are all open
to better suggestions.

I really do want to hear better ideas or whatever, but I don't want this to
keep coming up, over and over again...

...I'm really tired of all the time this list takes anyway.

---
James Newton: PICList webmaster/Admin
.....jamesnewtonKILLspamspam@spam@piclist.com  1-619-652-0593 phone
http://www.piclist.com/member/JMN-EFP-786
PIC/PICList FAQ: http://www.piclist.com



2005\03\17@145615 by steve

flavicon
face
> Response from the Admins regarding list moderation.

What a perfect example of why this type of censorship sucks. There is
more at stake here than warm, fuzzy feelings about the list. You're
playing with people's livelyhoods.

I'm sure I'm not the only person who refers business to other list
members. Usually you can get a fair impression of the strengths,
weaknesses and character from the list postings.

My observation recently has been that Olin must be less stressed (or
something) than in the past.
Now you are saying that this may be a false impression created by the
list admins. If you are dumping a large number of his posts, then you
are skewing that impression.

I have no idea if Olin has truly mellowed, if it's the same or if he has
become more obnoxious. It could well be the factor that is the difference
between a contract or not.

For the record, I've had absolutely no business dealings with Olin. I
don't even think I have ever communicated with him outside of the list.

I'm rather disappointed that the Piclist credibility is also heading
downhill.

Steve.



2005\03\17@145931 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
> May I ask what an 'Olin incident' is? (or if someone would
> care to explain off-list

You could browse the archive of the last year(s?) and find a few such
incidents. They generated *lost* of traffic.

Summary: Olin is good at tech but not so good at communication. Some
people take some of his posts badly (some people disappeared from the
list for this reason). Admins respond by (in the end) banning Olin. Some
people take this badly (some people disappeared from the list for this
reason). Admins (and Olin?) find a solution: some people on the list
(mainly newbies and Olin) are moderated. Result: Olins valued tech
responses are visibile, but the admins must check all post from him (and
a few others) and ban some. We don't see the banned posts, we don't see
their work.

> I have only been on the PIClist for a couple of years and perhaps know
> only half the story,  but Olin is one of the most helpful members of
> the PIClist community and the Microchip web forums.  Censoring him
> would be a disservice to the list and certainly diminish the
> quality of discussion here.

Actually 'sensoring' him might be a very valuable contribution to this
list, but a very ungratefull job. The alternative would be either to let
Olin loose (and loose a some other members) or ban Olin (and again some
- other - members). I am not sure how it's spelled, but there is some
greek story about Odisseus navigating his ship between a hammering rock
and something equally unpleasant...

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu


2005\03\17@150850 by Shawn Mulligan

flavicon
face
When in Rome.... You've made your bed, now lie in it.... Don't do the crime
if.... If you're going to live under my roof.... Fool me once.... etc...
etc... Nuff said.

2005\03\17@150901 by James Newton, Host

face picon face
> Despite what some of you seem to think, I really do
> appreciate the work the admins are doing in providing this
> list.  I don't think anyone here, including myself, wants to
> see more trouble made for the admins.

Thanks. We really do appreciate your answer to questions, etc...

{Quote hidden}

We get tired of doing it over and over when it has ALREADY caused a problem.
See, if we kick someone off the list AFTER they pissed someone off, then we
have not avoided the problem. Also, we miss out on the other brilliant posts
you would have sent during the time you were off the list.

Really, we are trying to help you see what you say that might generate a
reaction. If you would be willing to just reword the emails as suggested, we
would let the revised versions right on through. No loss, other than your
bending a bit on your wording, and us taking the time to help you with it.

---
James Newton: PICList webmaster/Admin
jamesnewtonspamKILLspampiclist.com  1-619-652-0593 phone
http://www.piclist.com/member/JMN-EFP-786
PIC/PICList FAQ: http://www.piclist.com



2005\03\17@151102 by olin_piclist

face picon face
James Newton, Host wrote:
> 2. I never directly said Olin would not be censored.

Then could you please explain what you did mean in the snippet I copied from
your post of 18 October.  I guess I completely misunderstood it.

> 3. Most of the time we reject message rather than drop them. Olin is the
> exception because we got tired of arguing with him.

There was exactly ONE message I received since October that any of my
messages got dropped.  That's how I found out you were still moderating me.
"Tired of arguing" leaves the impression that this happened on a regular
basis and I always fired off a message objecting.  I don't want people to
think that's what went on, since it didn't.


*****************************************************************
Embed Inc, embedded system specialists in Littleton Massachusetts
(978) 742-9014, http://www.embedinc.com

2005\03\17@151939 by Herbert Graf

flavicon
face
On Thu, 2005-03-17 at 14:33 -0500, Olin Lathrop wrote:
> I think kicking me off the list for a week or so would have been
> less work and frustration all around.  

Unfortunately that never seemed to work with you in the past.

> If you can only get kicked off
> forever, then there will be upset people and objections.  Since temporary
> situations fix themselves, nobody is going to get too worked up about them.
> I know I would have accepted it quietly.

But that's the thing Olin, it never DID get fixed. It would stay fixed
for a few months, and then a poor newbie would ask a question...

{Quote hidden}

And obviously something happened which made one of us (admins) put you
back on the moderate list. Do you think this is reasonable? I don't know
which of us put you back on. What other choice did we have?

> > At the weekend, Olin tried to post a message
> > to the list that we felt was inappropriate.  Rather than wasting a
> > whole lot of time, the message was discarded.
>
> But the problem is that there was nothing insulting or otherwise against any
> rules of PIClist conduct in that post.  It was deleted only because I was
> pointing out that I was being subjected to sensorship despite what I
> perceived as a promise not to.

Olin, I already explained that to you: the post was OFF TOPIC, it was
labelled as [PIC], yet the largest content of the message was your
comments on being on the mod list. I already told you privately that if
that post had been labelled [OT] (or I guess separated into two posts)
it would have probably been approved.

> > If Olin is happy to accept moderation until we feel he can post
> > directly to the list, then there is not a problem.
>
> So what does it take?  I've probably posted around a thousand messages since
> October.  How do we get past this?

There's nothing to get past. The list has already been changed to
accommodate you, a change which increased our collective workload, but
which we were willing to do to keep you here.

> No, I'm not "happy" to accept moderation, especially since I thought I was
> promised it would stop.

It did stop, as promised, at some point you were re-added to the mod
list, that's my guess as to what happened.

> Is this *really* necessary?

Absolutely. I was originally quite against the moderating system
proposed by James. I believed it would increase workload (and it did)
and would result in nothing better for the list. At this point I'd say I
was wrong (on the second point).

Moderation has worked incredibly well. Since we've had it we've had a
few people on the mod list (newbies mostly) who tried to post things
that would have most certainly disrupted the list (one or two being
completely kicked off the list). It's also helped in guiding newbie's
with regards to tagging their posts correctly.

Of course, since it's been so effective very few ON the list have
noticed anything, which is the only problem with moderation: problem
posters never get seen, so nobody thinks there are ever problems.




-----------------------------
Herbert's PIC Stuff:
http://repatch.dyndns.org:8383/pic_stuff/

2005\03\17@152721 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
> I'm rather disappointed that the Piclist credibility is also heading
> downhill.

Sorry Steve, I absolutely disagree with you. The backbone of your
argument is that you feel you could assume that this list is 'free for
all'. If you want to assume that (or anything else) it your own
responisibility to verify your assumption!

Generally, I do *not* feel like anything about this list is going
downhill, at least not faster than the rest of the world.

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu


2005\03\17@152920 by James Newton, Host

face picon face

> What a perfect example of why this type of censorship sucks.
> There is more at stake here than warm, fuzzy feelings about
> the list. You're playing with people's livelyhoods.

EXCUSE ME!?!?

When did the PICList become a business oriented resource? When did it become
incumbent on us to support your, or anyone else's, livelihood?

'cause you know what? I don't get paid enough to deal with that sort of
responsibility.

Think about that. Ask yourself how much we get paid. I do this for the
hobbyists. You have microchip forums for advertising your paid services.

Then if you want a list that worries about your income, go start one, PAY
the list admins, and GET OFF THIS ONE. Or stay on the microchip forums.

Better yet, volunteer to work as an admin and help us deal with this stuff
so we have more time to work on our OWN livelihoods.

Or did I misunderstand and just incorrectly assume that you are completely
ungrateful for the $$$ you can MAKE from this FREE, University hosted,
volunteer admin'd list?

---
James Newton: PICList webmaster/Admin
.....jamesnewtonKILLspamspam.....piclist.com  1-619-652-0593 phone
http://www.piclist.com/member/JMN-EFP-786
PIC/PICList FAQ: http://www.piclist.com



2005\03\17@153644 by olin_piclist

face picon face
James Newton, Host wrote:
> We get tired of doing it over and over when it has ALREADY caused a
> problem. See, if we kick someone off the list AFTER they pissed someone
> off, then we have not avoided the problem.

But the problem last time caused by my post was relatively minor.  The large
discussion ensued when I got kicked off.

> Really, we are trying to help you see what you say that might generate a
> reaction. If you would be willing to just reword the emails as
> suggested, we would let the revised versions right on through. No loss,
> other than your bending a bit on your wording, and us taking the time
> to help you with it.

I'm not sure what you are referring to.  You only objected to one post I
made since October, which I didn't care much about being deleted.  The one
that started this discussion was silently deleted without notification.
There has never been any suggestions on how to reword a post.

It seems like a lot of trouble to deal with a very rare occurrance.


*****************************************************************
Embed Inc, embedded system specialists in Littleton Massachusetts
(978) 742-9014, http://www.embedinc.com

2005\03\17@154807 by James Newton, Host

face picon face
See? There is a perfect example of when a moderator could have helped me
reword that... <GRIN>

Ok, I know logically that I'm going to end up apologizing for the tone of
that post. So I'll get it over with:

I'm sorry. I apologize. I overreacted. I guess I feel like I'm on trial here
again and that is making me over-sensitive.

I'm sure you just didn't think about things from my point of view and
perhaps your point of view is also very valid.

If I had said that nicer, perhaps you could see my point of view?

Again, sorry, please try to look past the emotions and see what I'm saying
behind that...

---
James.



> {Original Message removed}

2005\03\17@155145 by James Newtons Massmind

face picon face

>
> I'm not sure what you are referring to.  You only objected to
> one post I made since October, which I didn't care much about
> being deleted.  The one that started this discussion was
> silently deleted without notification.
> There has never been any suggestions on how to reword a post.
>


So are you suggesting that as moderators, we should be more careful to
ALWAYS reject posts when we have a problem with them and to directly promise
NOT to just silently delete them?

I'm amenable to that... Guys?

---
James.



2005\03\17@155515 by olin_piclist

face picon face
Herbert Graf wrote:
>> I think kicking me off the list for a week or so would have been
>> less work and frustration all around.
>
> Unfortunately that never seemed to work with you in the past.

It was never tried in the past.

> And obviously something happened which made one of us (admins) put you
> back on the moderate list. Do you think this is reasonable? I don't know
> which of us put you back on. What other choice did we have?

At the very least you could have told me.  This is the first I heard that
maybe I was not on moderation, then put back some time after 18 October.
This also implies there was a post that went to the list that you objected
to.  If so, I was never told of that either.  Whatever you guys do, at the
very least you should be up front about it.

> Olin, I already explained that to you: the post was OFF TOPIC, it was
> labelled as [PIC], yet the largest content of the message was your
> comments on being on the mod list. I already told you privately that if
> that post had been labelled [OT] (or I guess separated into two posts)
> it would have probably been approved.

Actually, no, I didn't get such a message from you.  The post was silently
deleted from what I could tell.  I apologize if a message got lost
somewhere.  I labeled it [PIC] because I copied the entire content of the
person asking me about an IIC bus problem, and I thought others could reply
to that if they wished.  The part about being moderated was a single
paragraph at the end.

>>> If Olin is happy to accept moderation until we feel he can post
>>> directly to the list, then there is not a problem.
>>
>> So what does it take?  I've probably posted around a thousand messages
>> since October.  How do we get past this?
>
> There's nothing to get past.

I was referring to the "until we feel he can post ..." part.  There is an
implied milestone in there somewhere.  If a thousand messages isn't enough,
what is?

> It did stop, as promised, at some point you were re-added to the mod
> list, that's my guess as to what happened.

It would have helped a lot if you had told me this at the time.  However,
I'm not sure this interpretation is correct since James feels he never made
any such promise.  One of the problems is lack of openess.

> Of course, since it's been so effective very few ON the list have
> noticed anything, which is the only problem with moderation: problem
> posters never get seen, so nobody thinks there are ever problems.

And nobody gets to find out what you think a problem is except the person
writing the particular post.


*****************************************************************
Embed Inc, embedded system specialists in Littleton Massachusetts
(978) 742-9014, http://www.embedinc.com

2005\03\17@160646 by olin_piclist

face picon face
James Newtons Massmind wrote:
>> I'm not sure what you are referring to.  You only objected to
>> one post I made since October, which I didn't care much about
>> being deleted.  The one that started this discussion was
>> silently deleted without notification.
>> There has never been any suggestions on how to reword a post.
>
> So are you suggesting that as moderators, we should be more careful to
> ALWAYS reject posts when we have a problem with them and to directly
> promise NOT to just silently delete them?

Actually I wasn't suggesting anything in particular in that statement.

What to you mean "always reject"?  As apposed to what?  So far I've had two
posts rejected (that I know of), one overtly and one silently.

Censorship is bad enough.  Secret sensorship is just plain wrong.  If you're
going to take some action, then you should be willing to stand up to the
results, not hope that nobody will notice.  In the end covert activity
always comes out, and then people get really pissed.


*****************************************************************
Embed Inc, embedded system specialists in Littleton Massachusetts
(978) 742-9014, http://www.embedinc.com

2005\03\17@161209 by Herbert Graf

flavicon
face
On Thu, 2005-03-17 at 12:51 -0800, James Newtons Massmind wrote:
> So are you suggesting that as moderators, we should be more careful to
> ALWAYS reject posts when we have a problem with them and to directly promise
> NOT to just silently delete them?
>
> I'm amenable to that... Guys?

No promises, but I'll try.


-----------------------------
Herbert's PIC Stuff:
http://repatch.dyndns.org:8383/pic_stuff/

2005\03\17@161246 by Ben Hencke

picon face
Hi James,
First, thanks for supporting this list. And thanks to all the other
admins too, even #5 <G>. I like reading about all this PIC stuff, and
even some of the crazy OT stuff too.

Second, I don't find anything wrong with your post. Maybe I have
"hardened skin" from being on this list too long :-)

Third, feel free to moderate people as you see fit to admin this list
and keep it an enjoyable place to talk about PICs.

Forth, I do not like secret message moderation. I find it ethically
troubling. I believe that people should know when a message is
moderated, and if possible for what reason. I know this is extra work,
but maybe even some pre-canned "No OT in PIC" or something similar
would be worlds better than nothing.

Thanks,
  Ben

On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 12:48:01 -0800, James Newton, Host
<EraseMEjamesnewtonspam_OUTspamTakeThisOuTpiclist.com> wrote:
{Quote hidden}

2005\03\17@163103 by Herbert Graf

flavicon
face
On Thu, 2005-03-17 at 15:54 -0500, Olin Lathrop wrote:
> Herbert Graf wrote:
> >> I think kicking me off the list for a week or so would have been
> >> less work and frustration all around.
> >
> > Unfortunately that never seemed to work with you in the past.
>
> It was never tried in the past.

Actually it was, you were kicked off, then came back without being
invited. We allowed you to stay based on your promise you wouldn't
revert to old behaviour. You didn't, for a while, and then did, and the
cycle happened again.

> > And obviously something happened which made one of us (admins) put you
> > back on the moderate list. Do you think this is reasonable? I don't know
> > which of us put you back on. What other choice did we have?
>
> At the very least you could have told me.  

Why? It would have just resulted in the mess that's happening now. You
would have demanded this be brought to the list. It would have been
brought to the list, a flame war would have happened, and in the end
nothing would have changed.

In retrospect all we ended up doing by NOT directly telling you directly
was delaying things, which resulted in a good few months of peace on the
list. Looking back I'd say it was the better choice, since at least we
did have that peace, until now.

> This is the first I heard that
> maybe I was not on moderation, then put back some time after 18 October.
> This also implies there was a post that went to the list that you objected
> to.  If so, I was never told of that either.  Whatever you guys do, at the
> very least you should be up front about it.

We are, except with you.

Frankly I'm tired of having to deal with you. I've never said this
before but I will now: I didn't personally want you back. The main
reason I was against moderation is it meant you would be back, and given
the amount of pain that involved in the past I didn't want it any more.

Obviously I wasn't the only one with a vote and things went differently.
I don't regret it, I was wrong about the moderation bit and it has been
great, until now.

{Quote hidden}

You're right, I rejected it without sending you a message, and I stand
by that, since it would have generated exactly what has now been
generated.

What I was talking about is the discussion you and I have had within the
past 24 hours, where I did explain why I rejected it. Of course, giving
the explanation resulted in the exact flood of crap on the list that we
have now, which means my intuition was correct: it was better to just
discard the message.

> > There's nothing to get past.
>
> I was referring to the "until we feel he can post ..." part.  There is an
> implied milestone in there somewhere.  If a thousand messages isn't enough,
> what is?

You are asking for absolutes, for hard numbers, there are none.

There are no written guidelines for when a person is brought off the mod
list. It's a decision made every time a post gets received. Obviously I
never felt it was time to bring you off the mod list. And obviously none
of the other moderators felt it was time.

And this flood now proves it wasn't time.

> > It did stop, as promised, at some point you were re-added to the mod
> > list, that's my guess as to what happened.
>
> It would have helped a lot if you had told me this at the time.  However,
> I'm not sure this interpretation is correct since James feels he never made
> any such promise.  One of the problems is lack of openess.

If you don't like it: leave. We'll refund the money you paid for this
list (which of course is zero).

> > Of course, since it's been so effective very few ON the list have
> > noticed anything, which is the only problem with moderation: problem
> > posters never get seen, so nobody thinks there are ever problems.
>
> And nobody gets to find out what you think a problem is except the person
> writing the particular post.

Right, which has worked brilliantly. Since moderation started I can only
think of one other poster who was put on the mod list, and I'm pretty
sure they are no longer on the list at all (lots of profanities and
stuff like that) (other admins will correct me if I'm wrong, my memory
isn't always the best).

Lots of newbies have been taken off the mod list.

At the core, the MAIN thing we as admin/mods want is the piclist to run
smoothly. As such what we consider "not appropriate" isn't static. Hence
there are no hard guidelines. Again, if you don't like it, leave.

-----------------------------
Herbert's PIC Stuff:
http://repatch.dyndns.org:8383/pic_stuff/

2005\03\17@163407 by James Newtons Massmind

face picon face
> > So are you suggesting that as moderators, we should be more
> careful to
> > ALWAYS reject posts when we have a problem with them and to
> directly
> > promise NOT to just silently delete them?
>
> Actually I wasn't suggesting anything in particular in that statement.

Do you have a suggestion? Other than "kick me off or a week or so"?

> What to you mean "always reject"?  As apposed to what?  So
> far I've had two posts rejected (that I know of), one overtly
> and one silently.

In the terminology of the mailman list server, "reject" informs the poster
that the post was rejected and "discard" rejects the post without
informing... Sadly the page defaults to discard so it may be that we just
made a mistake...

> Censorship is bad enough.  Secret sensorship is just plain
> wrong.  If you're going to take some action, then you should
> be willing to stand up to the results, not hope that nobody
> will notice.  In the end covert activity always comes out,
> and then people get really pissed.

Yes, yes... Ok... Let's concentrate on a solution rather than on fanning the
flames? We PIC Nazi SS officers would like to get back to our evil plans to
dominate hobby PIC use... <GRIN>

---
James Newton: PICList webmaster/Admin
jamesnewtonspamspam_OUTpiclist.com  1-619-652-0593 phone
http://www.piclist.com/member/JMN-EFP-786
PIC/PICList FAQ: http://www.piclist.com



2005\03\17@163809 by Herbert Graf

flavicon
face
On Thu, 2005-03-17 at 16:06 -0500, Olin Lathrop wrote:
> Censorship is bad enough.  Secret sensorship is just plain wrong.  If you're
> going to take some action, then you should be willing to stand up to the
> results,

If that's what you want Olin then I think you'll have to start paying
me.

The one post that you submitted which was discarded has now resulted in
me wasting probably around 2 hours of my time.

Let's set a rate of $70/hour, so that's $140. You willing to pay that?
See why we choose to just discard? For ONE POST you've wasted 2 HOURS of
my time.




-----------------------------
Herbert's PIC Stuff:
http://repatch.dyndns.org:8383/pic_stuff/

2005\03\17@164654 by James Newton, Host

face picon face

> Forth, I do not like secret message moderation. I find it
> ethically troubling. I believe that people should know when a
> message is moderated, and if possible for what reason. I know
> this is extra work, but maybe even some pre-canned "No OT in
> PIC" or something similar would be worlds better than nothing.
>


People keep saying "secret."

It IS NOT secret. Someone may have failed to warn Olin ONCE that ONE of his
posts was being rejected.

---
James Newton: PICList webmaster/Admin
@spam@jamesnewtonKILLspamspampiclist.com  1-619-652-0593 phone
http://www.piclist.com/member/JMN-EFP-786
PIC/PICList FAQ: http://www.piclist.com



2005\03\17@172204 by p.cousens

flavicon
So to summarise Olin has had.....TWO post in over a year censored and is
now complaining
Anyone else feel that they personally have had posts rejected unfairly?
Lets talk facts
 PC

> {Original Message removed}

2005\03\17@174938 by michael brown

picon face

From: "Herbert Graf" <KILLspammailinglist2KILLspamspamfarcite.net>


> On Thu, 2005-03-17 at 16:06 -0500, Olin Lathrop wrote:
> > Censorship is bad enough.  Secret sensorship is just plain wrong.
If you're
> > going to take some action, then you should be willing to stand up to
the
> > results,
>
> If that's what you want Olin then I think you'll have to start paying
> me.
>
> The one post that you submitted which was discarded has now resulted
in
> me wasting probably around 2 hours of my time.
>
> Let's set a rate of $70/hour, so that's $140. You willing to pay that?
> See why we choose to just discard? For ONE POST you've wasted 2 HOURS
of
> my time.

Now that was completely uncalled for.  Nobody makes you do the admin
job, you volunteered for it.  You have no right to complain to the list
in general (or Olin in specific) about the time you "waste" doing it.
For you to suggest that someone should pay you to be allowed to post
here is arrogant and asinine.

2005\03\17@175255 by Josh Koffman

face picon face
Fine with me. I'm generally too slow and someone beats me to dealing
with moderation requests anyways :)

Josh
--
A common mistake that people make when trying to design something
completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete
fools.
       -Douglas Adams

> On Thu, 2005-03-17 at 12:51 -0800, James Newtons Massmind wrote:
> > So are you suggesting that as moderators, we should be more careful to
> > ALWAYS reject posts when we have a problem with them and to directly promise
> > NOT to just silently delete them?
> >
> > I'm amenable to that... Guys?

2005\03\17@180259 by Shawn Mulligan

flavicon
face
Complaining about a free gift, of great value, that's accepted or rejected
voluntarily. Incredible!!!

Think about it.

2005\03\17@194903 by olin_piclist

face picon face
Herbert Graf wrote:
>> It was never tried in the past.
>
> Actually it was, you were kicked off, then came back without being
> invited.

Yes, but I was just told I was kicked off, period.  There has never been an
attempt that I've seen where I or anyone else was told "you're off the list
for xx days".

>> At the very least you could have told me.
>
> Why?

How about because it's the right thing to do for starters.

> It would have just resulted in the mess that's happening now.

No, this "mess" as you put it is because I had to find out indirectly I was
being moderated, and then to have a legitimate post silently blocked only
because you didn't like a part of the message, not because it was out of
line.  How would you feel?  Remember, I was content with a small paragraph
appended to a post about an IIC question.  It was getting that blocked that
"broke the camel's back", and I decided not to take it quietly anymore.

The bottom line is that if you treat people with a little respect, they
don't get as pissed off, and you don't end up with these kinds of
discussions.

> In retrospect all we ended up doing by NOT directly telling you directly
> was delaying things, which resulted in a good few months of peace on the
> list. Looking back I'd say it was the better choice, since at least we
> did have that peace, until now.

This is exactly the kind of attitude that gets people pissed off.  How would
you feel if this was done to you?

> and given
> the amount of pain that involved in the past I didn't want it any more.

I really don't want to cause you any pain, but I also don't understand
exactly how that happens.  I have no experience administering a list, so I
don't understand what goes on.  It would help if you explained how I've
caused you pain.  I know you don't like these kinds of discussions, but
those are as a result of what you did to me.  You can't treat me like dirt
and expect me to always take it quietly.

Let's say I imply someone is stupid, and they turn around and say FU.  There
will be a few posts telling me I was out of line, a few more telling the
other guy he was out of line, then it dies down.  At worst you have to send
two warnings and maybe a dozen message are wasted telling people they were
wrong.  Granted none of this should happen in the first place, and I can
certainly understand you don't like it to, but where's the "pain"?  I'm
seriously asking because I don't know what goes on at your level.  The more
I understand this, the more I can be careful to not cause it.

> And this flood now proves it wasn't time.

That's rather unfair.  It's like justifying someone belongs in an insane
assylum because he objects to being in an insane assylum.

>> One of the problems is lack of openess.
>
> If you don't like it: leave. We'll refund the money you paid for this
> list (which of course is zero).

I can accept you may not agree with my suggestion to be more open, but there
was no call for the "screw you" answer.  It seems to me you are going out of
your way to say your message in a way most likely to piss off the recipient.
And then you blame the recipient when they object to the treatment.  I think
your ends would be better served by showing a little respect and
consideration.  Think about how you'd feel (and what you'd do) if I talked
to you like that.  I have a right to be treated with the same respect you
demand from me.


*****************************************************************
Embed Inc, embedded system specialists in Littleton Massachusetts
(978) 742-9014, http://www.embedinc.com

2005\03\17@202800 by James Newton, Host

face picon face
> > If you don't like it: leave. We'll refund the money you
> paid for this
> > list (which of course is zero).
>
> I can accept you may not agree with my suggestion to be more
> open, but there was no call for the "screw you" answer.  It
> seems to me you are going out of your way to say your message
> in a way most likely to piss off the recipient.
> And then you blame the recipient when they object to the
> treatment.  I think your ends would be better served by
> showing a little respect and consideration.  Think about how
> you'd feel (and what you'd do) if I talked to you like that.  

> I have a right to be treated with the same respect you demand from me.


Actually...

No.

In the end, you don't have that right.

Why?

Because you don't make this list possible.

We do.

Yes, you have the right to be treated with respect, just as every other
human does.

But not the SAME respect.

We need, demand, and will have just a LITTLE BIT MORE respect than you on
this list.

And the same goes for all other USERS of this list.

We love you, we admire you, we respect you.

We think you all are cool.

But you MUST respect us just a little more than this.

We listen, we try to accept your suggestions, your ideas, your input good or
bad.

But in the end, WE and not YOU, have to make it happen.

And that has a cost. We have to make the final decision. We have to do the
actual work. We have to keep it all together.

And to do that, we need, demand, and will have some small amount of respect
for doing that...

... On top of the respect we all, you and I, all of us, are afforded.

You personally do not seem to see that. You seem think that just because we
are the list admins, that doesn't make us any more important than you are.
And I'm not saying it makes us a lot more important. And it doesn't make us
more important in any way other than just in this one way. But we are more
important to this list than you are.

You need to respect that.

I respect that you are a published author, that you have a successful
consulting business, that you are brilliant as a PIC engineer. All things
that I am not. At a masters conference, I will bow down and proclaim "I'm
not worthy." And that is probably true. I'm no where near the programmer
that you are. And I'm not better in any moral or other sense. I don't have
more patience than you, I get upset, I make rash statements, and I sure as
heck make mistakes.

But I am the one who has given hours and hours of his time to make this list
stay around. And so have the other admins. And we have tried our best to
make it the best list possible, based on all the experience we have gained,
on the feedback from ALL the list members, and from our own personally
beliefs, values, and so on.

And we say this:

Unless you can come up with a better idea, people on this list are going to
be polite (as we define it) and until or unless you show that you can be
polite, you will be moderated, and if you don't accept that, you can leave.

We aren't going to be "secret" about it. We are going to let anyone whose
post was rejected know that this was the case. In hindsight, it was probably
a mistake to drop your post without letting you know. We won't do that
again. Thank you for letting us know how it made you feel.

Now, if you want to take that to mean "screw you" then I don't know what to
say.

But please, have a little respect for what we do. Not much, just a little. A
little more respect than we have for you when it comes to your USE of the
list we make POSSIBLE.

---
James Newton: PICList webmaster/Admin
RemoveMEjamesnewtonTakeThisOuTspampiclist.com  1-619-652-0593 phone
http://www.piclist.com/member/JMN-EFP-786
PIC/PICList FAQ: http://www.piclist.com



2005\03\17@203642 by olin_piclist

face picon face
James Newtons Massmind wrote:
> Do you have a suggestion? Other than "kick me off or a week or so"?

That's one.  I'm also starting to realize that a lot of the problem was due
to "hidden" actions.  I think you can understand that finding out
accidentally that what you thought was a promise was broken a long time
earlier would get you a lot more pissed off than someone saying "because of
xxx we will no longer adhere to our previous deal".

So yes, I guess my suggestions so far are:

1 - Kick someone off for a limited time.  I still think this has merit
although I can also understand your arguments against it.

2 - If you are going to moderate someone, you should at least tell them so.
By the same token, it would probably be a nice touch if you told them when
they were getting off moderation.

3 - If you reject a post, always let the poster know.  The main argument is
an ethical one, but it's also not nice leaving someone wondering whether
their mail system has a problem.

4 - Keep in mind that presentation is important too.  There is absolutely no
upside to saying "Up yours, we're doing xxx" as apposed to "I'm sorry, but
we've decided to do xxx".  I mean the general "you", and am not picking on
you personally.  I appreciate the civil tone you've shown towards me in this
discussion.

5 - I really really don't like moderation.  I think it's morally evil, but I
can also see I'm not going to convince you of that.

I think someone deliberately trying to cause trouble is very rare.  Most
problems are short term flare ups of tempers due to some perceived insult,
injustice, or whatever.  This is human nature and isn't going to go away.
Small flareups are going to happen, but that doesn't mean anyone set out to
hurt the list deliberately.  I understand you need to deal with these
situations, but treating someone harshly can fan the flames more than put
them out.  In the long run you will get a lot more cooperation if you don't
treat them like the enemy, because most likely they aren't.

> Yes, yes... Ok... Let's concentrate on a solution rather than on
> fanning the flames? We PIC Nazi SS officers would like to get back to
> our evil plans to dominate hobby PIC use... <GRIN>

Zehr gut.  Zounds like fun.  Vehr do I signen me up?  Ze PIC today, ze virld
tomorrow!


*****************************************************************
Embed Inc, embedded system specialists in Littleton Massachusetts
(978) 742-9014, http://www.embedinc.com

2005\03\17@203900 by Dave VanHorn

flavicon
face

>
>Yes, yes... Ok... Let's concentrate on a solution rather than on fanning the
>flames? We PIC Nazi SS officers would like to get back to our evil plans to
>dominate hobby PIC use... <GRIN>

Zee AVR Rezistance vill fight you tooth and nail!  (trying to inject a drop
of humour....)


2005\03\17@203947 by olin_piclist

face picon face
Herbert Graf wrote:
> The one post that you submitted which was discarded has now resulted in
> me wasting probably around 2 hours of my time.

But that time was wasted *because* the post was just discared.

Oh well, I can see I'm not going to convince you of anything.

*****************************************************************
Embed Inc, embedded system specialists in Littleton Massachusetts
(978) 742-9014, http://www.embedinc.com

2005\03\17@205307 by James Newtons Massmind

face picon face
> 2 - If you are going to moderate someone, you should at least
> tell them so.
> By the same token, it would probably be a nice touch if you
> told them when they were getting off moderation.

I can agree to that. Guys?

> 3 - If you reject a post, always let the poster know.  The
> main argument is an ethical one, but it's also not nice
> leaving someone wondering whether their mail system has a problem.

I've already agreed to that and the consensus among the admins seems to be
ok with that.

> 4 - Keep in mind that presentation is important too.  There
> is absolutely no upside to saying "Up yours, we're doing xxx"
> as apposed to "I'm sorry, but we've decided to do xxx".  I
> mean the general "you", and am not picking on you personally.
>  I appreciate the civil tone you've shown towards me in this
> discussion.

See my post on respect. Feel free to revise your opinion. <GRIN> I guess
what I should say is that if you have seen a "up yours" in our responses, it
is because we see an "up yours" in your lack of respect for our decisions. I
personally have felt that you have little or no respect for my position on
this list. Hopefully I'm wrong.

{Quote hidden}

I do agree with that. But you need to respect our opinion when it comes to
the pattern we believe we have seen in your posts. You tend to piss people
off. We are trying to help avoid that. I don't think you are trying to do
anything bad, and I don't think of you as the enemy. At worst, I think of
you as a royal pain in the .... <GRIN> At best, I think of you as a genius
with a PR problem. In my own, stumbling way, I'm trying to help you with
that PR issue at the same time I'm trying to keep this list very polite. I
know I'm not always polite and I've probably done more damage to your PR
than good, but I am trying to help, and I do think we can eventually get it
right.

{Quote hidden}

2005\03\17@211423 by Herbert Graf

flavicon
face
On Thu, 2005-03-17 at 20:38 -0500, Dave VanHorn wrote:
> >
> >Yes, yes... Ok... Let's concentrate on a solution rather than on fanning the
> >flames? We PIC Nazi SS officers would like to get back to our evil plans to
> >dominate hobby PIC use... <GRIN>
>
> Zee AVR Rezistance vill fight you tooth and nail!  (trying to inject a drop
> of humour....)

Oh man, NOW you've done it, mentioning the forbidden word is just too
far... :) (actually, don't tell anyone, but I have flirted with the dark
side once or twice, but I'm back now, or am I...)


-----------------------------
Herbert's PIC Stuff:
http://repatch.dyndns.org:8383/pic_stuff/

2005\03\17@212903 by Herbert Graf

flavicon
face
On Thu, 2005-03-17 at 19:48 -0500, Olin Lathrop wrote:
> Herbert Graf wrote:
> >> At the very least you could have told me.
> >
> > Why?
>
> How about because it's the right thing to do for starters.

No doubt it's the right thing to do, but biking to work can also be the
right thing to do. When it's -20degrees outside it's simply to painful
to do, therefore I don't do it. Same issue here.

> > It would have just resulted in the mess that's happening now.
>
> No, this "mess" as you put it is because I had to find out indirectly I was
> being moderated, and then to have a legitimate post silently blocked only
> because you didn't like a part of the message, not because it was out of
> line.  

Wrong. It was off topic (as I've said to you maybe 3 times now, you
simply don't listen...).

> > and given
> > the amount of pain that involved in the past I didn't want it any more.
>
> I really don't want to cause you any pain, but I also don't understand
> exactly how that happens.  I have no experience administering a list, so I
> don't understand what goes on.  It would help if you explained how I've
> caused you pain.  I know you don't like these kinds of discussions, but
> those are as a result of what you did to me.  You can't treat me like dirt
> and expect me to always take it quietly.

Pain? What about the flame wars we had to quash? What about the newbie's
that blamed US for how THEY were treated by YOU? What about the long
time contributers that left because of some of the comments you made
(again blaming us for letting you stay on the list)? Finally, what about
the time you slammed me in the face when I had a newbie question (yup, I
was also a newbie at one time assaulted by you)?

> Let's say I imply someone is stupid, and they turn around and say FU.  There
> will be a few posts telling me I was out of line, a few more telling the
> other guy he was out of line, then it dies down.  At worst you have to send
> two warnings and maybe a dozen message are wasted telling people they were
> wrong.  Granted none of this should happen in the first place, and I can
> certainly understand you don't like it to, but where's the "pain"?  I'm
> seriously asking because I don't know what goes on at your level.  The more
> I understand this, the more I can be careful to not cause it.

Umm, actually, in the case where you DID get someone to respond with FU,
the person proceeded to send me a bunch of personal messages laced with
profanities and personal insults directed at myself and my family after
we decided to kick them off. Hence pain...

> Think about how you'd feel (and what you'd do) if I talked
> to you like that.  I have a right to be treated with the same respect you
> demand from me.

Nope, I was going to write why, but James is far more diplomatic then I,
check his message for why...

-----------------------------
Herbert's PIC Stuff:
http://repatch.dyndns.org:8383/pic_stuff/

2005\03\17@213239 by Herbert Graf

flavicon
face
On Thu, 2005-03-17 at 16:47 -0600, michael brown wrote:
> > Let's set a rate of $70/hour, so that's $140. You willing to pay that?
> > See why we choose to just discard? For ONE POST you've wasted 2 HOURS
> of
> > my time.
>
> Now that was completely uncalled for.  Nobody makes you do the admin
> job, you volunteered for it.  

Correct.

> For you to suggest that someone should pay you to be allowed to post
> here is arrogant and asinine.

Actually that's NOT what I said. I'll zip my mouth shut now, obviously
people are reading more into my words then are there.

But for the record:

I think it's pretty obvious my suggestion was ridiculous and not real.


-----------------------------
Herbert's PIC Stuff:
http://repatch.dyndns.org:8383/pic_stuff/

2005\03\17@214922 by Dave VanHorn

flavicon
face

>
>Oh man, NOW you've done it, mentioning the forbidden word is just too
>far... :) (actually, don't tell anyone, but I have flirted with the dark
>side once or twice, but I'm back now, or am I...)

Shh.. Don't blow your cover!   Did I mention that the Mega-256 is out?


2005\03\17@220224 by Herbert Graf

flavicon
face
On Thu, 2005-03-17 at 21:49 -0500, Dave VanHorn wrote:
> >
> >Oh man, NOW you've done it, mentioning the forbidden word is just too
> >far... :) (actually, don't tell anyone, but I have flirted with the dark
> >side once or twice, but I'm back now, or am I...)
>
> Shh.. Don't blow your cover!   Did I mention that the Mega-256 is out?

Really? What goodies does it have beyond the 128? I assume it's
supported by the standard set of programmers? TTYL


-----------------------------
Herbert's PIC Stuff:
http://repatch.dyndns.org:8383/pic_stuff/

2005\03\17@222614 by Bob Ammerman

picon face
....Much of James nattering on about respect and how as admins they deserve
"A LITTLE BIT MORE" (his shouting) than the mere users of the list.


Whoeeee.......

Now you have MY dander up, James. While I appreciate your efforts to keep
the list running well, it wouldn't be worth having the list if it wasn't for
those who so freely offer their time and technical advice. After all, that
is really what the list was created for in the beginning, wasn't it?

I think the Wouter's and Olin's and Scott's and many others deserve plenty
of respect and admiration.

So, when are you going to start moderating my posts? Will it be secretly or
openly? Or will this message get me bounced off the list?

Bob Ammerman
RAm Systems


JAMES' POST FOLLOWS IN ITS ENTIRETY (except for list footers)

{Original Message removed}

2005\03\17@225238 by Peter van Hoof

flavicon
face
[snip]
> Finally, what about
> the time you slammed me in the face when I had a newbie
> question (yup, I
> was also a newbie at one time assaulted by you)?
[snip]

And a little furry friend crawls out of its bag.
I always wondered why you where particuarly animate about the
subject at hand.

Peter

spamBeGonepeterspamBeGonespamwhacky-scientist.com


2005\03\17@233327 by Alexandre Guimaraes

face picon face
Hi,

> So are you suggesting that as moderators, we should be more careful to
> ALWAYS reject posts when we have a problem with them and to directly
> promise
> NOT to just silently delete them?
>
> I'm amenable to that... Guys?

   I almost never get them fast enough to reject anyway... But I think it
is much better to tell why it was rejected.

Best regards,
Alexandre Guimaraes

.
Message-ID: <018501c52b73$9b56d640$e6029987@AlexNoteBook>
From: "Alexandre Guimaraes" <TakeThisOuTlistasEraseMEspamspam_OUTlogikos.com.br>
To: "Microcontroller discussion list - Public." <RemoveMEpiclistspamTakeThisOuTmit.edu>
References: <20050317205355710.AAA373EraseMEspam.....nt2.massmind.orgEraseMEspam.....SONYGRT270PB>> Subject: Re: [OT]: PIClist censorship
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 01:33:17 -0300
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
       format=flowed;
       charset="iso-8859-1";
       reply-type=original
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2527
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2527

Hi,

> So are you suggesting that as moderators, we should be more careful to
> ALWAYS reject posts when we have a problem with them and to directly
> promise
> NOT to just silently delete them?
>
> I'm amenable to that... Guys?

   I almost never get them fast enough to reject anyway... But I think it
is much better to tell why it was rejected.

Best regards,
Alexandre Guimaraes


2005\03\17@233559 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
> So, when are you going to start moderating my posts? Will it be
> secretly or openly? Or will this message get me bounced off the
> list?

Not good enough I'm afraid.
To achieve this you'll have to post it under a PIC tag and be really
rude to everyone for a while. Come back and try again when you've got
it right.


       RM

2005\03\18@000749 by Dave VanHorn

flavicon
face
At 10:02 PM 3/17/2005, Herbert Graf wrote:
>On Thu, 2005-03-17 at 21:49 -0500, Dave VanHorn wrote:
> > >
> > >Oh man, NOW you've done it, mentioning the forbidden word is just too
> > >far... :) (actually, don't tell anyone, but I have flirted with the dark
> > >side once or twice, but I'm back now, or am I...)
> >
> > Shh.. Don't blow your cover!   Did I mention that the Mega-256 is out?
>
>Really? What goodies does it have beyond the 128? I assume it's
>supported by the standard set of programmers? TTYL

I haven't run through the data sheet myself yet, but IIRC it's twice the
code space of the M128 , which would be 128k instructions, and FOUR uarts,
plus some other goodies.

I'm heavy in a crash project on the 128 at the moment, so I don't want to
"upset" my head and get the data sheets confused at the wrong minute.



2005\03\18@002941 by Mike Singer

picon face
James Newton, Host wrote:
> 4. Olin has always been welcomed to start his own list and manage
> it how he  likes. I think he has the necessary resources to do so. I will
> be more than happy to help in any way I can. Seriously.

Olin succeeded in producing a set of PIC-programmers already.
I think that this thread just means that he is going to step further.
And I suspect that the hidden (maybe hidden for himself) goal
was just to get exactly this kind of response from you. Being
essentially a moral person, he, in my opinion is trying to clarify
and fix the current state of matters in order to not being accused
in future in having had done sort of immoral things now.

It's easy to start a forum now. He could try some free blog first,
say http://www.blogger.com or google groups. Then he could move to
some fee-based blog. I'd suggest http://www.webhost4life.com as
a host and free .Text blog software.

There was a post (Google it)

"WebHost4Life Review : My First Year with WebHost4Life"

by Scott Mitchell, the most Googlable ASP.NET person on the
Earth. Participating in MCHP forum, Olin could attract a lot of
folks to his blog by just placing the link in his posts.
Then he could give a whirl to some full-blown free forum
software package and I bet a lot of guys will shift to the forum
from PICList and MCHP forum.

And eventually he could build a commercial site similar to
translator's site http://proz.com . Only being not the sort of
mediator between translators and Translation Agencies and
direct customers, but rather between EE developers and EE
customers. I posted this idea in more details to PICList a
couple of months ago, but the post seems not to show up on
the list.

Regards,
Mike.

2005\03\18@022702 by Vlad

flavicon
face
On Thu, Mar 17, 2005 at 09:01:33PM +0100, Wouter van Ooijen wrote:
> > May I ask what an 'Olin incident' is? (or if someone would
> > care to explain off-list
>
> You could browse the archive of the last year(s?) and find a few such
> incidents. They generated *lost* of traffic.
>
> Summary: Olin is good at tech but not so good at communication. Some
> people take some of his posts badly (some people disappeared from the
> list for this reason). Admins respond by (in the end) banning Olin. Some
> people take this badly (some people disappeared from the list for this
> reason). Admins (and Olin?) find a solution: some people on the list
> (mainly newbies and Olin) are moderated. Result: Olins valued tech
> responses are visibile, but the admins must check all post from him (and
> a few others) and ban some. We don't see the banned posts, we don't see
> their work.

I see where you are coming from and I partially agree.  After looking
through the archives, I see why some people may be turned off by
a handful of Olin's remarks.

Novices, amateurs, newbs, etc always seem get chastised for one reason
or another, but thats just business as usual on the Net.  Trial by fire
if you will.  Nevermind that they are asking for _free_ help!

Perhaps having been on Usenet and IRC since the early 90' desensitized me
to these things and helped me develop a tougher skin for the characters
every forum attracts, but I personally don't see it as that big of a deal.

As an aside - What ever happened to lurking before posting, or reading
the forums FAQs and charter?  Even before I wrote my very first message
to the PIClist I already had a clear picture of the personalities behind
most emails;  Who the clueful folk were, and what was appropriate.
Nowadays the moment someone has a problem, they subscribe to forum X,
cry for help and in the process violate some rule or neglect to read the
FAQ and then get chastised.... and well, here we are.  Drama on PIClist :)

Cheers
-v

2005\03\18@023809 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
> I think the Wouter's and Olin's and Scott's and many others
> deserve plenty of respect and admiration.

Ah, I am mentioned directly. Well, of course we technical contributors
can expect some respect *on that aspect*. (For some reason I prefer
shouting with *'s instead of capitals.) However, don't forget that
technical contributions would just be words in the wind without an
audience! And personaly I contribute, but occasionaly I also get very
valuable responses from the list.

But we (technnical contributors) don't give a second of our precious
time to the invisible, repetitive, boring, unthankfull work of keeping
this list alive in all aspects except our technical contributions. So on
*that* aspect we should respect the admins. Yes, respect them (a little
bit) more than other members.

IMHO power should be with the ones who do the dirty work. If you
disagree: you can either join the admins (they will probably welcome
you), or start your own list (easy enough on yahoo or a similar
service), or (as I do) admit that I am more than sufficiently satisfied
with the way this list is handled, and anyway much too lazy to set up my
own list.

> So, when are you going to start moderating my posts?

Did you ever give reason for the admins to do so?

> JAMES' POST FOLLOWS IN ITS ENTIRETY (except for list footers)

Drat, please please use the select-and-delete. If I want to find James'
post in its entirely I can find it, realy.

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu


2005\03\18@032037 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
> As an aside - What ever happened to lurking before posting, or reading
> the forums FAQs and charter?

That applies to *everyone*, both newbies and Olin. And on this list the
FAQ/charter or whatever takes that role clearly state what's allowed,
and that the ruling of the admins is final. It also states that the
admins will always welcome new blood....

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu


2005\03\18@033442 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
>> > May I ask what an 'Olin incident' is? (or if someone would
>> > care to explain off-list
...

{Quote hidden}

So are many other things that happen in the world. But it is desired
by those whose desires are enforceable that here people are somewhat
politer than in the jungle. The standard for newbies is phasers set to
warm, torpedoes set to gentle but firm correction, screens set to
tolerate more than usual.  The object is to NOT drive away at first
post those who might otherwise become valued members of the group.
Some people have demonstrated a remarkable propensity to burn
newcomers off the face of the list. It's remotely possible that we may
have achieved one suicide in the process, but PROBABLY not. (No - I'm
not going to elaborate - read the archives if it's of interest).

The list ethos is also to be at least passingly polite to each other
as well. This isn't always perfectly achieved, BUT you can't be
offended by a person whose opinion you don't value, and after a while
you learn whose opinions are valuable to you. Some members have highly
valuable technical opinions and, arguably, far far less valuable
social ones. Who these members are depends on who you are :-).

> Nevermind that they are asking for _free_ help!

Free help is a major thing that the list offers. People are not
encouraged to seek to be spoon fed - questioners who indicate that
they have not done their homework are liable to be gently pointed
towards Google, the faq or other sources. people who are attempting to
get the list to complete their school project for them 2 weeks before
it is due in are liable to be disappointed. But the aim is to not burn
even those people off the list.

> Perhaps having been on Usenet and IRC since the early 90'
> desensitized me
> to these things and helped me develop a tougher skin for the
> characters
> every forum attracts,

That will be what's happened :-).

> but I personally don't see it as that big of a deal.

You aren't obliged to - as long as you act as if you do. Each may feel
that others deserve as rude and profane and vitriolic rejoinder as
they wish - as long as they don't actually tender such :-). But stick
with us long enough and you MAY find the process a little humanising.
It's usually a far far nicer place here than most open lists.

> As an aside - What ever happened to lurking before posting, or
> reading
> the forums FAQs and charter?  Even before I wrote my very first
> message
> to the PIClist I already had a clear picture of the personalities
> behind
> most emails;  Who the clueful folk were, and what was appropriate.

Such preparation is appreciated - we would much rather that people do
as you have done. But we'd rather educate than incinerate those who
don't do due diligence first.

> Nowadays the moment someone has a problem, they subscribe to forum
> X,
> cry for help and in the process violate some rule or neglect to read
> the
> FAQ and then get chastised....

In many cases, yes. Here too, but more politely and with education in
mind.

> and well, here we are.  Drama on PIClist :)

No. The current drama here is because someone who can't see the point
of doing it the way it is done here dredged up an old hurt and posted
it to the list. The post was rejected for reasons (good or bad) which
have been discussed at length in this thread and away we went.  if
they'd taken their lumps in the first (or tenth) place and not gone
back to a long dead issue and said how they were right all along etc
then there would now not be any drama.

Note:    Don't mistake this list for a democracy -it's a (usually
almost :-) ) benign dictatorship. People can democratically offer all
the suggestions they wish. Good suggestions are acted on. The benign
dictator decides which decisions are good ones. If someone offered to
take over from the dictator at the moment he may just accept. I'd
strongly advise against it :-).

FWIW - I have no authority here. I'm just the village nuisance. (Tough
job but someone's got to do it). When I say "we" I am interpreting
through my mental filters and world view the ethos of this community
as it is described in the FAQ and promulgated by the BD and his
barons. Others may see it differently (and some indeed do).


           Russell McMahon



2005\03\18@051104 by Mike Hawkshaw

flavicon
face
From: "Herbert Graf"
Subject: Re: [OT]: PIClist censorship

> > because you didn't like a part of the message, not because it was out of
> > line.
>
> Wrong. It was off topic.....

Sorry, Herbert, but I couldn't let this go without a comment. I sympathise
with your possition, and thank you (all) for doing what you do, and having
done what you have done in the past.

I really think you have to be very careful to consider why you are using
moderation. When it was first introduced, I believed it was to stop spats
happening due to newbies or whosevers rude comments upsetting someone. I
appluad that.

But to reject a message because it is OT, would seem harsh in the extream.
Threads can go on for ages with the wrong tag before a friendly word from
James sends it to OT.

If the post was rejected because it was basically incorrectly tagged, then I
think this was wrong. There have been several new posters recently who have
posted with no tag at all, and their posts were let through.....

Respectful regards....Mike.

2005\03\18@054338 by michael brown

picon face
From: "Herbert Graf" <EraseMEmailinglist2spamfarcite.net>


> On Thu, 2005-03-17 at 19:48 -0500, Olin Lathrop wrote:

> > I really don't want to cause you any pain, but I also don't
understand
> > exactly how that happens.  I have no experience administering a
list, so I
> > don't understand what goes on.  It would help if you explained how
I've
> > caused you pain.  I know you don't like these kinds of discussions,
but
> > those are as a result of what you did to me.  You can't treat me
like dirt
> > and expect me to always take it quietly.
>
> Pain? What about the flame wars we had to quash? What about the
newbie's
> that blamed US for how THEY were treated by YOU? What about the long
> time contributers that left because of some of the comments you made
> (again blaming us for letting you stay on the list)?

I certainly don't recall any newbies blaming you (or any other admin for
that matter) for Olins postings.  Perhaps you could cite a reference?

> Finally, what about
> the time you slammed me in the face when I had a newbie question (yup,
I
> was also a newbie at one time assaulted by you)?

And now we arrive at the true cruxt of the matter.  Herb has a personal
vendetta to fulfill.


2005\03\18@055953 by Dan Smith

face picon face
As I was away from my computer all last night, I'll respond now...

Olin's first suggestion was:

> 1 - Kick someone off for a limited time.  I still think this has merit
> although I can also understand your arguments against it.

If we are trying to formulate some rules for list 'governance', then
this will not work.  While I appreciate that Olin would honour such a
ban, others probably wouldn't as it is trivially easy to subscribe
from a different address.  This is one reason why we introduced
automatic moderation for new subscribers.  After one incident where a
subscriber was removed, both myself and Herbert received 'hate email'
for want of a better description.  The person involved did try to
resubscribe from different email addresses and we fortunately caught
the attempt.  Again, these are the sorts of things which go on in the
background.

On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 17:53:05 -0800, James Newtons Massmind
<RemoveMEjamesnewtonEraseMEspamEraseMEmassmind.org> wrote:
> > 2 - If you are going to moderate someone, you should at least
> > tell them so.

I think it would be easier to put a message in the new subscribers
message that moderation is routine for new subscribers for their first
few posts.  I'm happy to notify an existing subscriber if they are
being added to the moderated list.

> > By the same token, it would probably be a nice touch if you
> > told them when they were getting off moderation.
> I can agree to that. Guys?

No problem with this either.

> > 3 - If you reject a post, always let the poster know.  The
> > main argument is an ethical one, but it's also not nice
> > leaving someone wondering whether their mail system has a problem.
>
> I've already agreed to that and the consensus among the admins seems to be
> ok with that.

Fine with me.

> > > Yes, yes... Ok... Let's concentrate on a solution rather than on
> > > fanning the flames?

I couldn't agree more.  Constructive opinions/criticisms/advice will
be gratefully received.

Dan

2005\03\18@060409 by Alan B. Pearce

face picon face
>> > because you didn't like a part of the message, not because it was out
of
>> > line.
>>
>> Wrong. It was off topic.....
>
>Sorry, Herbert, but I couldn't let this go without a comment. I sympathise
>with your possition, and thank you (all) for doing what you do, and having
>done what you have done in the past.

...

{Quote hidden}

I would have to second Mike here. Having waded through the 50 odd posts on
this subject, it does seem that Olin has a point. Not having seen the
message (because the Admins rejected it) I can only go on Olins description
of it. Now it would seem that it was on-topic, as the prime subject of it
was about I2C, and that was most of the message.

However the post seems to have been rejected because of a single paragraph
on the bottom where he explained that he doesn't answer these messages, but
the Admin who dealt with it took umbrage at the explanation. Now without
knowing precisely how the explanation was worded, this may or may not have
been reasonable. But in view of the rest of the content, it would seem
reasonable to have bounced it back, and asked for the paragraph to be
altered or removed.

<shifty eyes paranoid mode>

Having seen all these comments on Olins post, I went looking for my
responses to Wouters post asking for info (under the [EE] tag) for info on
the SD/MMC interface spec. Having had two posts not appear, and reposted
them the next day, I looked to see if any had appeared, and could not find
them. However I did find the second pair in the archive, so they obviously
"got out into the wild". However knowing that there was an on-site power
failure which took out the mail servers, I think I know why they never came
back to me. But seeing the string of messages about Olins post did make me
twitchy, and want to check. I know that there are messages that do go
missing in the ether of the Internet, because I see replies to messages
where I have never seen the original.

</shifty eyes paranoid mode>

2005\03\18@065236 by Gerhard Fiedler

picon face
Russell McMahon wrote:

>> As an aside - What ever happened to lurking before posting, or reading
>> the forums FAQs and charter?  Even before I wrote my very first message
>> to the PIClist I already had a clear picture of the personalities
>> behind most emails;  Who the clueful folk were, and what was
>> appropriate.
>
> Such preparation is appreciated - we would much rather that people do
> as you have done. But we'd rather educate than incinerate those who
> don't do due diligence first.

Exactly. Especially if you think that doing so (lurking before posting,
reading the faq and charter, google around some) would make the online
world a better place -- in this case it doesn't make much sense to offend
the ones who don't, because that won't make it more likely that they follow
your example.

Gerhard

2005\03\18@070703 by michael brown

picon face
Herbert Graf wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-03-17 at 15:54 -0500, Olin Lathrop wrote:
>> Herbert Graf wrote:
>>>> I think kicking me off the list for a week or so would have been
>>>> less work and frustration all around.
>>>
>>> Unfortunately that never seemed to work with you in the past.
>>
>> It was never tried in the past.
>
> Actually it was, you were kicked off, then came back without being

Nobody needs to be invited to the piclist.  You couldn't keep someone
off permanently if you wanted to, it's just not technically possible.

> invited. We allowed you to stay based on your promise you wouldn't
> revert to old behaviour. You didn't, for a while, and then did, and
> the cycle happened again.

When?  The only person I see here making a scene is you Herbert.  You
are deliberately trying to provoke Olin and that really stinks coming
from an _admin_.

{Quote hidden}

It belongs on the list.  This should be a democratic process if you
really want peace on the list.  OTOH if you want lots of discord then
I suppose it would be appropriate to run it like some kind of fascist
dictatorship.

> In retrospect all we ended up doing by NOT directly telling you
> directly was delaying things, which resulted in a good few months of
> peace on the list. Looking back I'd say it was the better choice,
> since at least we did have that peace, until now.

The ends justify the means?

>> This is the first I heard that
>> maybe I was not on moderation, then put back some time after 18
>> October. This also implies there was a post that went to the list
>> that you objected to.  If so, I was never told of that either.
>> Whatever you guys do, at the very least you should be up front
>> about it.
>
> We are, except with you.

That's just arrogant.

> Frankly I'm tired of having to deal with you. I've never said this
> before but I will now: I didn't personally want you back. The main
> reason I was against moderation is it meant you would be back, and
> given the amount of pain that involved in the past I didn't want it
> any more.

The truth surfaces.  This statement alone should disqualify you as an
admin.

{Quote hidden}

And you would have deserved it then just as do now.  Why wouldn't you
want to stand behind (defend) your decisions?  Secretive censorship
has no place here, or anywhere else for that matter.

> What I was talking about is the discussion you and I have had within
> the past 24 hours, where I did explain why I rejected it. Of course,
> giving the explanation resulted in the exact flood of crap on the
> list that we have now, which means my intuition was correct: it was
> better to just discard the message.

The "flood of crap" you are experiencing is directly caused by your
actions not Olin's.  One must allways assume that there will be some
kind of consequence to their actions.  You seem to want to wave your
admin scepter around and punish people you simply don't like, because
they embarrassed you in the past.  That's a bunch of bull.

{Quote hidden}

I think it proves that it's time for YOU to step down as an admin.

{Quote hidden}

More arrogance and pretentiousness.  The cost is not zero if one has to
listen to rude and condescending remarks from an admin.

{Quote hidden}

It's a selective problem I think.

> Lots of newbies have been taken off the mod list.

> At the core, the MAIN thing we as admin/mods want is the piclist to
> run smoothly. As such what we consider "not appropriate" isn't
> static. Hence there are no hard guidelines. Again, if you don't like
> it, leave.

How about if we don't like you and your methods?  What is the
procedure to have you impeached?  That's not a rhetorical question.

I may sound like some kind of evil piclist troll, but I've been on
this list for over 4 years.  I'm just really unhappy about some
things I see taking place and want to get it off my chest.  If it
results in me being kicked from the list so be it.  Attempting to
sanitize the piclist into some kind of politically correct clean room
in the midst of the internet is a pointless exercise in futility
anyway.  I am the original thin-skinned person, but the internet is
no place for that.  Olin has made me feel dumb in the past too, but I
can't say I didn't deserve it.  ;-)  If you're still mad about
something Olin said to you years ago, then you really should try to
just get over it and move on.

TTYL

2005\03\18@074313 by olin_piclist

face picon face
Herbert Graf wrote:
> Pain? What about the flame wars we had to quash? What about the newbie's
> that blamed US for how THEY were treated by YOU? What about the long
> time contributers that left because of some of the comments you made
> (again blaming us for letting you stay on the list)?

And I was supposed to know about any of this how?  It's really a shame that
it's not possible to have a civil conversation with you.  I asked a question
in a civil manner because I wanted to know the answer, and you respond with
a mocking tone, although there is at least some content in there.

> Finally, what about
> the time you slammed me in the face when I had a newbie question (yup, I
> was also a newbie at one time assaulted by you)?

I don't remember anything about that.  If you can find the reference I can
respond.

To clear up an often stated misconception, I have nothing against newbies.
I would sometimes slam people for being arrogant, pretentious, lazy, or
asking stupid questions.  Stupid meaning that person should easily have
known better.  If it appeared I responded that way more often to newbies, I
think that's only because people new to the list tend to barge in demand we
fix a problem for them than people who have been around a while and
understand how the list works.

> Umm, actually, in the case where you DID get someone to respond with FU,
> the person proceeded to send me a bunch of personal messages laced with
> profanities and personal insults directed at myself and my family after
> we decided to kick them off. Hence pain...

OK, thanks.  That makes it clearer.

>> Think about how you'd feel (and what you'd do) if I talked
>> to you like that.  I have a right to be treated with the same respect
>> you demand from me.
>
> Nope, I was going to write why, but James is far more diplomatic then I,
> check his message for why...

James took this to mean respect on the PIClist, which isn't how I meant it.
I agree you guys deserve an additional measure of respect on the PIClist for
putting in the time to keep it running.  However, I was talking about
respect in general.  I have tried hard to have a civil conversation with
you, but no matter what I say you come back with "up yours, in your face"
responses.  PIClist admin or not, there was absolutely no call for that.


*****************************************************************
Embed Inc, embedded system specialists in Littleton Massachusetts
(978) 742-9014, http://www.embedinc.com

2005\03\18@075413 by olin_piclist

face picon face
James Newtons Massmind wrote:
> I guess
> what I should say is that if you have seen a "up yours" in our
> responses, it is because we see an "up yours" in your lack of respect
> for our decisions. I personally have felt that you have little or no
> respect for my position on this list. Hopefully I'm wrong.

Yes, you are.  I respect the volunteer time you put in to keep this list
running.  You also have to distiguish between lack of respect for your
decisions and disagreement with some of them.

{Quote hidden}

OK, well I guess you're going to do what you're going to do.  I think some
progress has been made, but the bottom line is I'm still on moderation.
If/when you decide to let me off, let me know and I'll start answering
technical questions again.  In the mean time, I'll be over at the Microchip
web board more.


*****************************************************************
Embed Inc, embedded system specialists in Littleton Massachusetts
(978) 742-9014, http://www.embedinc.com

2005\03\18@082355 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
>Attempting to
> sanitize the piclist into some kind of politically correct clean
> room
> in the midst of the internet is a pointless exercise in futility
> anyway.  I am the original thin-skinned person, but the internet is
> no place for that.

Why not?
Just because the internet largely operates approximately at the same
level as Somalia*, why do we have to accept the same sort of
behaviour? Regardless of the merits of the discussion at hand, why
should we expect that levels of rudeness and personal abuse such as
you have been posting should be daily fare? Do you really think that
that's the way that this list, or any list, should be expected to
operate? Do you think that such an approach is liable to achieve your
desired ends or help Olin's case?

It's arguably legitimate (albeit possibly futile ;-) ) to question the
admins' actions, but it needs to be done in a productive and reasoned
manner if one wants to have any hope of success.



       RM

* Not a random choice - example meant to be relevant.


2005\03\18@082822 by olin_piclist

face picon face
Russell McMahon wrote:
> No. The current drama here is because someone who can't see the point
> of doing it the way it is done here dredged up an old hurt and posted
> it to the list. The post was rejected for reasons (good or bad) which
> have been discussed at length in this thread and away we went.  if
> they'd taken their lumps in the first (or tenth) place and not gone
> back to a long dead issue and said how they were right all along etc
> then there would now not be any drama.

That's easy for you to say since your not the one getting censored.  I
thought this was a long dead issue too, and happy to leave it that way,
until I found out *recently* that I was subjected to censorship behind my
back, which is still ongoing.

One incident in over a year, and that 5 months ago, you'd think would be
ancient history by now.  But censorship is still ongoing.  If I don't say
anything, nothing changes.  If I do say something, I get blamed for dredging
up old issues.  Remember, I started out not attacking censorship, but only
letting people know why I was not responding to technical questions.


*****************************************************************
Embed Inc, embedded system specialists in Littleton Massachusetts
(978) 742-9014, http://www.embedinc.com

2005\03\18@091426 by Herbert Graf

flavicon
face
On Fri, 2005-03-18 at 00:07 -0500, Dave VanHorn wrote:
> >Really? What goodies does it have beyond the 128? I assume it's
> >supported by the standard set of programmers? TTYL
>
> I haven't run through the data sheet myself yet, but IIRC it's twice the
> code space of the M128 , which would be 128k instructions, and FOUR uarts,
> plus some other goodies.

4 UARTS? Wow, I already have a project that one could be used in! :)
TTYL


-----------------------------
Herbert's PIC Stuff:
http://repatch.dyndns.org:8383/pic_stuff/

2005\03\18@091623 by michael brown

picon face

----- Original Message -----
From: "Russell McMahon" <RemoveMEapptechspam_OUTspamKILLspamparadise.net.nz>
To: "Microcontroller discussion list - Public." <RemoveMEpiclistTakeThisOuTspamspammit.edu>
Sent: Friday, March 18, 2005 7:23 AM
Subject: Re: [OT]: PIClist censorship


{Quote hidden}

One vent off in over four years hardly seems a daily fare.

> that's the way that this list, or any list, should be expected to
> operate? Do you think that such an approach is liable to achieve your
> desired ends or help Olin's case?

I said my piece, I'm done.  I appologize if I offended any list members.

> It's arguably legitimate (albeit possibly futile ;-) ) to question the
> admins' actions, but it needs to be done in a productive and reasoned
> manner if one wants to have any hope of success.

I chose to participate in a conversation that should have probably been
offlist.  However, it wasn't offlist so I joined in and said what I
thought (in typical piclist fashion).  ;-)  I wasn't trying to undermine
the admins.

If the admins wish to ban me that is their prerogative, but I would like
to ask that all my posts be removed from the archive and from James'
techref area.  I also wish my Dallas 1-wire search routine and any other
code I submitted over the last four or five years be removed from these
locations as well.

2005\03\18@092236 by Herbert Graf

flavicon
face
On Fri, 2005-03-18 at 10:11 +0000, Mike Hawkshaw wrote:
> But to reject a message because it is OT, would seem harsh in the extream.
> Threads can go on for ages with the wrong tag before a friendly word from
> James sends it to OT.

The point of moderation is to keep things running smoothly. There are
quite a few people on this list that DON'T subscribe to OT. Trust me,
every time there is a thread in PIC that isn't PIC we the mods/admins
get complaints about it. We've even had some quite valuable people LEAVE
because we weren't "controlling the content of PIC well enough".

Therefore, rejecting posts with incorrect tags for modded people has
been something we've been doing since moderation started. It's been very
effective.

Somewhere else in this thread someone mentioned that some newbies post
without lurking. They are absolutely correct. And some of the first
posts from some newbies have the wrong tag. Rejecting the message has
meant the list has been MUCH cleaner in the PIC and EE tags.

Note that this isn't a very big problem anyways. I don't have concrete
numbers but I believe there are only TWO active posters on the mod list,
as of this moment.

> If the post was rejected because it was basically incorrectly tagged, then I
> think this was wrong. There have been several new posters recently who have
> posted with no tag at all, and their posts were let through.....

Really? I didn't notice that. Only thing I can guess is these new
posters WERE lurkers since before moderation and weren't on the mod
list. If you see something like that please feel free to point it out to
us PRIVATELY (no reason to post it to the list) and we'll take care of
things.

Again, all most list members see is the RESULT of moderation. As such
you don't see what's really going on. Heck, moderation has even stopped
some spam from hitting the list! :)

TTYL


-----------------------------
Herbert's PIC Stuff:
http://repatch.dyndns.org:8383/pic_stuff/

2005\03\18@092802 by Herbert Graf

flavicon
face
On Fri, 2005-03-18 at 04:39 -0600, michael brown wrote:
> > Pain? What about the flame wars we had to quash? What about the
> newbie's
> > that blamed US for how THEY were treated by YOU? What about the long
> > time contributers that left because of some of the comments you made
> > (again blaming us for letting you stay on the list)?
>
> I certainly don't recall any newbies blaming you (or any other admin for
> that matter) for Olins postings.  Perhaps you could cite a reference?

You are only seeing 1/2 of one side of the story (maybe less). I can't
site a reference since they were personal messages to us admins and I
don't see why even more has to be dredged up here. Of course it happened
a while ago and even if I tried to look for the emails I probably
wouldn't find them.

> > Finally, what about
> > the time you slammed me in the face when I had a newbie question (yup,
> I
> > was also a newbie at one time assaulted by you)?
>
> And now we arrive at the true cruxt of the matter.  Herb has a personal
> vendetta to fulfill.

Hehe, personal vendetta, I like that. No, sorry, but there's no personal
vendetta, I'm over that. In fact Olin has helped me in a few threads
after that incident (it was of course a VERY long time ago and I don't
even remember what it was about).

However, I was asked about pain, and supplied reasons for it.


-----------------------------
Herbert's PIC Stuff:
http://repatch.dyndns.org:8383/pic_stuff/

2005\03\18@095016 by Josh Koffman

face picon face
On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 09:22:36 -0500, Herbert Graf
<EraseMEmailinglist2spamspamspamBeGonefarcite.net> wrote:
> Again, all most list members see is the RESULT of moderation. As such
> you don't see what's really going on. Heck, moderation has even stopped
> some spam from hitting the list! :)

Just as an aside, you'd be surprised how much spam we get to the list
address and to the admin address. Really annoying. Russell, find us a
link to some sort of device used in the middle ages to rid incoming
messages of spam. And no, I won't accept "shooting the messenger" :)

Josh

--
A common mistake that people make when trying to design something
completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete
fools.
       -Douglas Adams

2005\03\18@103628 by Dennis Crawley

flavicon
face
michael brown <RemoveMEspam-meKILLspamspamhouston.rr.com> wrote:
>  Attempting to
>  sanitize the piclist into some kind of politically correct clean room
>  in the midst of the internet is a pointless exercise in futility
>  anyway.

Wrong.
This is not "internet". This is a known place, with real people behind the
screen.

> I am the original thin-skinned person, but the internet is
> no place for that.

Yes, but I'm sure you uses polite manners to discourage some one to ask some
questions instead of insult the poster.

The ramifications to be "wild" on Internet are unpredictable. It has more
sense to be cool. For example, suppose you live two blocks away from the guy
you made a fool of, and the guy is 2mts tall and 100Kg, big hands, I think
you will reconsider your statment :) (skin? in this case the thicker the
better!)

Be aware of Virtual thing. It becomes Fact very fast.

Integrity!

Best Regards
Dennis Crawley

BTW, With good modes your embedded systems sales can improved ;)





2005\03\18@111002 by Bradley Ferguson

picon face
Hasn't Godwin's Law been sufficiently satisfied, yet?

Bradley
( http://www.jargon.net/jargonfile/g/GodwinsLaw.html )

2005\03\18@111152 by michael brown

picon face

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dennis Crawley" <proyectosenpicSTOPspamspamspam_OUTyahoo.com.ar>
To: "Microcontroller discussion list - Public." <spamBeGonepiclistSTOPspamspamEraseMEmit.edu>
Sent: Friday, March 18, 2005 9:35 AM
Subject: Re: [OT]: PIClist censorship


> michael brown <KILLspamspam-mespamBeGonespamhouston.rr.com> wrote:
> >  Attempting to
> >  sanitize the piclist into some kind of politically correct clean
room
> >  in the midst of the internet is a pointless exercise in futility
> >  anyway.
>
> Wrong.
> This is not "internet". This is a known place, with real people behind
the
> screen.

Please don't misunderstand me.  I do not wish for wild-west type rules
or a mob like situation.  But I do think that trying to take a cultural
melting pot like the piclist and attempting to convert a bunch of
engineers into some kind of stepford wives that can all communicate
efficiently, without anyones feelings getting hurt, is unlikely to
happen.  ;-)  Again don't misunderstand me, I think all people should be
nice but the real world adds well.....reality...to the situation.  What
one person finds socially acceptable another will not, that's just the
reality of individualism.

> > I am the original thin-skinned person, but the internet is
> > no place for that.
>
> Yes, but I'm sure you uses polite manners to discourage some one to
ask some
> questions instead of insult the poster.

I generally make a practice of not insulting others, but perhaps I do
sometimes go off "half-cocked" and jump in with both feet when I think
someone is being wronged.  Any time that I percieve some kind of
political oppression (country dictator/president level or piclist admin
level makes no difference) I tend to get upset.

> The ramifications to be "wild" on Internet are unpredictable. It has
more
> sense to be cool. For example, suppose you live two blocks away from
the guy
> you made a fool of, and the guy is 2mts tall and 100Kg, big hands, I
think
> you will reconsider your statment :) (skin? in this case the thicker
the
> better!)

Unless you happen to be 2 mtrs tall and 100kg with big hands too.  ;-)
I'm not exactly, but I'm just saying.  ;-)  ;-)  ;-)

> Be aware of Virtual thing. It becomes Fact very fast.
>
> Integrity!

That's what I'm saying.  Legitimate questions deserve legitimate
answers.  Anyone in any administrative position of power should be
willing to defend their administrative actions and reasonably explain
them when asked.  Does anyone really think this is too much to expect?

> Best Regards
> Dennis Crawley
>
> BTW, With good modes your embedded systems sales can improved ;)

:-?

2005\03\18@120745 by Herbert Graf

flavicon
face
On Thu, 2005-03-17 at 17:53 -0800, James Newtons Massmind wrote:
> > 3 - If you reject a post, always let the poster know.  The
> > main argument is an ethical one, but it's also not nice
> > leaving someone wondering whether their mail system has a problem.
>
> I've already agreed to that and the consensus among the admins seems to be
> ok with that.

For the record, I guess I'm a go with that, posts that are rejected will
include a reason to the person posting.

TTYL

-----------------------------
Herbert's PIC Stuff:
http://repatch.dyndns.org:8383/pic_stuff/

2005\03\18@131000 by Bob Axtell

face picon face
My 2cents:

The PICLIST is James' brainchild, so he makes the rules. Period.
Whatever James says, goes.

--Bob

Herbert Graf wrote:

{Quote hidden}

--
Note: To protect our network,
attachments must be sent to
EraseMEattachspamEraseMEengineer.cotse.net .
1-866-263-5745 USA/Canada
http://beam.to/azengineer

2005\03\18@133033 by James Newtons Massmind

face picon face
I love that one...
...and I don't mind loosing the argument at all, IF I can be assured it is
over.

---
James.



{Quote hidden}

> -

2005\03\18@133328 by James Newton, Host

face picon face
> Please don't misunderstand me.  I do not wish for wild-west type rules
> or a mob like situation.  But I do think that trying to take
> a cultural
> melting pot like the piclist and attempting to convert a bunch of
> engineers into some kind of stepford wives that can all communicate
> efficiently, without anyones feelings getting hurt, is unlikely to
> happen.  ;-)  Again don't misunderstand me, I think all
> people should be
> nice but the real world adds well.....reality...to the
> situation.  What
> one person finds socially acceptable another will not, that's just the
> reality of individualism.

Perfection is beyond our reach but it is NOT beyond our grasp. Meaning that
we should keep trying even if we are doomed to fail. Because success and
failure are not black and white only. We can try for a "lighter shade of
grey."

> That's what I'm saying.  Legitimate questions deserve legitimate
> answers.  Anyone in any administrative position of power should be
> willing to defend their administrative actions and reasonably explain
> them when asked.  Does anyone really think this is too much to expect?


Sure, sure, I'll do that in my other spare time...
...as long as we can both agree on what is a reasonable expanation.

---
James Newton: PICList webmaster/Admin
.....jamesnewtonspam_OUTspampiclist.com  1-619-652-0593 phone
http://www.piclist.com/member/JMN-EFP-786
PIC/PICList FAQ: http://www.piclist.com



2005\03\18@140125 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
> That's what I'm saying.  Legitimate questions deserve legitimate
> answers.  Anyone in any administrative position of power should be
> willing to defend their administrative actions and reasonably explain
> them when asked.  Does anyone really think this is too much to expect?

Yes, I do.

It is already more than I expect that the admins are doing their work,
and IMHO they do at least as good a job as you or I would do. You are
free to think otherwise, you are free to state your opinion, you are
free to ask the admins for their motives, you are free to hope they can
find the unpaid extra time (beyond the work they already do for the
list) to answer you, you are free to join them and do better than they
currently do, but they are *not* your civil servants payed by your
money, so you have no right to *demand* any explanation.

PS IIRC a disgrunted PIClister left the list years ago and started the
yahoo piclist. That list still exists and does carry some traffic. It is
somehwat more newbie-oriented than the PIClist. So if you feel you can
do better, why not do so?

PPS The PIClist itself is not a democracy, but the internet as a whole
is in some way. If you don't like a particular corner of the internet
(for instance this list) you can vote with your feet. Don't
underestimate the power in that, it is what brought the Berlin wall
down.

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu


2005\03\18@165446 by Ben Hencke

picon face
On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 10:10:01 -0600, Bradley Ferguson
<TakeThisOuTbradleyee.....spamTakeThisOuTgmail.com> wrote:
> Hasn't Godwin's Law been sufficiently satisfied, yet?
>
> Bradley
> ( http://www.jargon.net/jargonfile/g/GodwinsLaw.html )

Only the first part, I'm still waiting for the second part to happen
(not the losing part, the upper bounds part).
- Ben


PS. If this thread not going away and since it is OT, can Olin repost
his IIC email here? I'm actually curious about both the technical PIC
and topic relevant OT parts.

2005\03\18@182156 by olin_piclist

face picon face
Ben Hencke wrote:
> PS. If this thread not going away and since it is OT, can Olin repost
> his IIC email here? I'm actually curious about both the technical PIC
> and topic relevant OT parts.

I didn't keep a copy (I wasn't expecting an "issue" to arise from it).  An
admin was able to look it up later, so one of them would have to post it.


*****************************************************************
Embed Inc, embedded system specialists in Littleton Massachusetts
(978) 742-9014, http://www.embedinc.com

2005\03\19@010200 by Mike Singer

picon face
> Frankly I'm tired of having to deal with you. I've never said this
> before but I will now: I didn't personally want you back. The main
> reason I was against moderation is it meant you would be back, and given
> the amount of pain that involved in the past I didn't want it any more.

But the elder son was very angry, and would not go in to the feast,
but said to his father, "Lo, these many years have I served thee, and
never offended or disobeyed thee, and thou hast never made a feast for
me and my friends; but now this thy other son has come back, that has
wasted thy wealth in riotous living, thou hast made a great feast for
him." And his father said, "Son, thou art ever with me, and all I have
is thine. It is right that we should make merry and be glad, for this
thy brother was as one dead to us and is alive again; he was lost and
is found."

-------------------------
Mike ;-)

2005\03\19@030513 by michael brown

picon face

----- Original Message -----
From: "Wouter van Ooijen" <TakeThisOuTwouterKILLspamspamspamvoti.nl>
To: "'Microcontroller discussion list - Public.'" <.....piclistspamRemoveMEmit.edu>
Sent: Friday, March 18, 2005 1:03 PM
Subject: RE: [OT]: PIClist censorship


> > That's what I'm saying.  Legitimate questions deserve legitimate
> > answers.  Anyone in any administrative position of power should be
> > willing to defend their administrative actions and reasonably
explain
> > them when asked.  Does anyone really think this is too much to
expect?
>
> Yes, I do.
>
> It is already more than I expect that the admins are doing their work,
> and IMHO they do at least as good a job as you or I would do. You are

You misunderstand me, in my fit of anger yesterday I guess I didn't make
myself clear.  I feel the same way as you do about the efforts of the
admins, check my really old posts.  I took exception with exactly *one*
admin and his antagonistic (as I see it) approach with Olin.  I am not
trying to commandeer the piclist.  I want peace around here as much as
anyone does.

> free to think otherwise, you are free to state your opinion, you are
> free to ask the admins for their motives, you are free to hope they
can
> find the unpaid extra time (beyond the work they already do for the
> list) to answer you, you are free to join them and do better than they
> currently do, but they are *not* your civil servants payed by your
> money, so you have no right to *demand* any explanation.

I wasn't "demanding" anything, so please put the straw man away now.
;-)  However, I think it's only fair that an admin answer a direct
question from a list member that they are modding.  If they have time to
be evasive and condascending (again this is just how I saw it and maybe
you think I'm wrong), then it stands to reason that they would also have
the time to come directly to the point, answer the question and be done
with it.  Fair enough?  :-)

> PS IIRC a disgrunted PIClister left the list years ago and started the
> yahoo piclist. That list still exists and does carry some traffic. It
is
> somehwat more newbie-oriented than the PIClist. So if you feel you can
> do better, why not do so?

Yes, I'm aware of the yahoo piclist group, it has almost 2000 members.
I'm a member just as you are, but I haven't really posted much.  IIRC,
my one and only post there was directed to you wrt pendulum clock
accuracy vs. crystals.  BTW, I'm not exactly a newbie at this pic thing.
I'm not sure how I gave you that impression.

> PPS The PIClist itself is not a democracy, but the internet as a whole
> is in some way. If you don't like a particular corner of the internet
> (for instance this list) you can vote with your feet. Don't
> underestimate the power in that, it is what brought the Berlin wall
> down.

Again, I'm not trying to bring upon the demise of the piclist nor am I
interested in competing with it.   I saw something that I didn't agree
with and spoke up.  Since it was an already existing thread (apparently
started by an admin) I joined in and stated my opinion.  I thought
that's what we did around here, but I'll try to bite my tongue in the
future.
;-)  ;-)  ;-)


2005\03\19@041142 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
> I saw something that I didn't agree
> with and spoke up.  Since it was an already existing thread
> (apparently
> started by an admin) I joined in and stated my opinion.  I thought
> that's what we did around here, but I'll try to bite my tongue in
> the
> future.
> ;-)  ;-)  ;-)

Stating opinions is almost always OK. Sometimes less wise than other
times though :-). I'm sure the point of your concerns were understood,
if not totally appreciated by some. It was more the tone of
presentation that let your message down. Things written at a white
heat are best left in the draft folder for a few hours for review.
Reading them again can let you take some of the rougher corners off.
Generally speaking, reference to a certain political system last used
about 60 years ago, or to any of its key members, is asking for
trouble and  unlikely to advance your cause :-). Criticism of a
person's actions which verge on criticism of the person personally are
liable to lead to undesired responses if others don't see the
distinction quite as clearly as you do.

Some of the issues you raised may well merit discussion in a less
volatile context. Already out of this exchange there has come an
agreement that those whose messages are excluded will receive a
message advising that this has happened and why. This addresses some
of Olin's concerns and some of yours so the exercise has not been
without worth. It would be nice though if we could achieve such
worthwhileness with less pain and acrimony. I'm sure we're learning
how to deal with such things better with time - Olin has some use
apart from his undoubted technical capabilities :-)


       Russell McMahon


2005\03\19@050814 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
> I took exception with exactly *one*
> admin and his antagonistic (as I see it) approach with Olin.

IIRC the admins have made it very clear that they want to be seen as a
team, so IMHO you should not single out any one. If that needs to be
done it is up to them.

> However, I think it's only fair that an admin answer a direct
> question from a list member that they are modding.

I still think otherwise. I don't see why someone who puts a lot of time
in managing the list is hence required to put even more time in it when
someone asks him. I agree with you that it is polite to answer, but I
think the fact that someone volunteers a lot of time entitles him to
moore leeway than others, not less.

> BTW, I'm not exactly a newbie at this
> pic thing.
> I'm not sure how I gave you that impression.

No impression at my side at all. My judgement of the yahoo list was
purely informational, just to state that alternatives do exist and have
some function, so when someone is realy dissatisfied he can try for
himself, and probably with some success. I subscribe to it too, I
occasionaly post. Often I just reply, and I am not even aware whether
the discussion is on the piclist or the yahoo list.

Side note: I don't recall any discussion like this on the yahoo list.
Does the piclist atract the bigger ego's, do the piclisters take their
membership much more serious, or is the piclist 'model' inferior (or
superior)? (Of course I have my opinion.)

> Again, I'm not trying to bring upon the demise of the piclist nor am I
> interested in competing with it.   I saw something that I didn't agree
> with and spoke up.  

Fine, no problem, appreciated.

The only thing I reacted upon was that you seemed to *require* something
from one of the admins. IMHO that is a bit rude.

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu


2005\03\19@051940 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
responding to my own post. must be a bad sign?

> No impression at my side at all. My judgement of the yahoo
> list was purely informational, just to state that
> alternatives do exist and have some function, so when someone
> is realy dissatisfied he can try for himself, and probably
> with some success. I subscribe to it too, I occasionaly post.
> Often I just reply, and I am not even aware whether the
> discussion is on the piclist or the yahoo list.

But I don't recall ever having asked a question on the yahoo list!

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu


2005\03\19@053709 by William Chops Westfield

face picon face
On Mar 17, 2005, at 11:53 AM, James Newton, Host wrote:

>> May I ask what an 'Olin incident' is?
>
> I guess I can say that sometimes other people (not Olin) have
> reacted very negatively to the way Olin has said things. They
> have expressed that they felt insulted by the words he used.
>

That's only part of it, though.  The other part is that as a result
of the relatively minor slips in civility and resulting hurt feelings,
the list devolves in scores of messages on the nature of free advice,
volunteerism, leather skin, language choice, culture, etiquette, and
so on, and no one talks about PICs for days on end.

Rather like it has done now.  Sigh.

BillW

2005\03\19@064537 by Howard Winter

face
flavicon
picon face
James,

I used to be WizOp of a Compuserve forum, "Mad Dogs &
Englishmen", which was effectively the OT section of
UKFORUM.  One of our basic rules was that discussions of
policy or Sysop decisions were banned from the forum, so
this whole thread would have been axed!  We (UKFORUM
Sysops) found that by doing this we avoided a lot of
heated, and ultimately useless, discussion, because the
rules were what they were, and there was no point
arguing it.  That forum was no more a democracy than
this one, and with good reason - it doesn't work.

Over the years it developed into a friendly, busy (more
busy than all of the other UK forums put together) and
interesting place.  Occasionally we'd have to remove a
message (there was no way to pre-moderate, as you seem
to have) and *always* explained why to the poster.  
Almost always they responded positively.  

Once in a Blue Moon we had someone who was either a
vandal, or just went OTT when "told the rules" and they
would be banned, usually until they asked to come back.  
Very few were banned permanently (less than half a
dozen, out of thousands of participants) because they
couldn't agree to abide by the rules - that's life!

But disallowing discussions such as this one was the key
to a smooth running forum!

Cheers,


Howard Winter
St.Albans, England


2005\03\19@072615 by Gerhard Fiedler

picon face
Josh Koffman wrote:

>> Heck, moderation has even stopped some spam from hitting the list! :)
>
> Just as an aside, you'd be surprised how much spam we get to the list
> address and to the admin address. Really annoying.

I'm not sure I understand this. I thought that we were only able to post to
the list with the address of a signed-up member in the From header. Does
this mean that spammers make the effort to find a list member's address and
post as the list member? That's not a big effort, for sure, but still more
than collecting email addresses... and more targeted.

Gerhard

2005\03\19@073635 by Gerhard Fiedler

picon face
William ChopsWestfield wrote:

> That's only part of it, though.  The other part is that as a result
> of the relatively minor slips in civility and resulting hurt feelings,
> the list devolves in scores of messages on the nature of free advice,
> volunteerism, leather skin, language choice, culture, etiquette, and
> so on, and no one talks about PICs for days on end.
>
> Rather like it has done now.  Sigh.

Don't sigh too much... I think this is the price that has to be paid in
order to make it work /much/ better than other forums or newsgroups most of
the time. The common understanding about how to talk to each other has to
come from somewhere, it's not just there. IMO these relatively open and
controversial discussions every now and then have their part in creating
it.

Take the fact that this discussion did not end up as a flame war (despite
some very personal issues being involved) as a sign of the high standards
here, created through the exercise of these discussions :)

Gerhard

2005\03\19@080041 by Josh Koffman

face picon face
Sorry I wasn't clearer. When someone tries to post without signing up,
we will sometimes get a moderation request from the list software. In
addition, all emails to the piclist-owner account come straight
through. Obviously someone has harvested that address from a webpage
or something because the volume of spam arriving there has increased a
fair bit.

Also, just so everyone knows, if you post a message with a large
attachment, we get a moderation request for that as well. So, if your
post with the 1MB .jpg doesn't show up, it might have been rejected. I
think we've all agreed to do a true reject though, which will bounce a
message back to the sender and tell you why :)

Josh
--
A common mistake that people make when trying to design something
completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete
fools.
       -Douglas Adams

On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 09:25:53 -0300, Gerhard Fiedler
<RemoveMElistsspamspamBeGoneconnectionbrazil.com> wrote:
> > Just as an aside, you'd be surprised how much spam we get to the list
> > address and to the admin address. Really annoying.
>
> I'm not sure I understand this. I thought that we were only able to post to
> the list with the address of a signed-up member in the From header. Does
> this mean that spammers make the effort to find a list member's address and
> post as the list member? That's not a big effort, for sure, but still more
> than collecting email addresses... and more targeted.

2005\03\20@001025 by Mike Singer

picon face
Just to clarify the idea of my post..

I was told by someone off-list:

> When everyone has just stood down from DEFCON1 it probably
> isn't a good idea to make such jokes.
> Alas, it's also possible that some will not really understand the
> context, but will understand well enough that its "religious stuff"
> and complain on that basis :-(.

Most, I hope, got it as that we should value every human, even "useless" one, not to say about those who are (the) most valuable persons on the list.
Personally I appreciate greatly Bob Ammerman's approach if I've got it correctly, - are we owners, hosts, holders, bosses, masters &#8211; the gold rule is not that "he who has gold, makes rules",  but that old 10 rules described a long while  ago.

Regards,
Mike.


Mike Singer wrote:
{Quote hidden}

> is found."

2005\03\20@071528 by Gerhard Fiedler

picon face
Josh Koffman wrote:

> When someone tries to post without signing up, we will sometimes get a
> moderation request from the list software.

Sounds like a support request to the list software writer is in order?

> In addition, all emails to the piclist-owner account come straight
> through. Obviously someone has harvested that address from a webpage or
> something because the volume of spam arriving there has increased a fair
> bit.

Maybe you route the admin address through an account with something like
Boxtrapper installed. (This is one of the systems that require a
confirmation email from the sender if she isn't on a white list. All list
members and host admin personnel would be on the white list.) This is a
spam reduction method questioned by some, but I think in this case it is
justified.

Gerhard

2005\03\20@132729 by Josh Koffman

face picon face
On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 09:15:10 -0300, Gerhard Fiedler
<spamBeGonelists@spam@spamspam_OUTconnectionbrazil.com> wrote:
> Maybe you route the admin address through an account with something like
> Boxtrapper installed. (This is one of the systems that require a
> confirmation email from the sender if she isn't on a white list. All list
> members and host admin personnel would be on the white list.) This is a
> spam reduction method questioned by some, but I think in this case it is

The thing is, we often get email from people having trouble signing
up...so I don't think a whitelist of already subscribed people would
work. Thankfully at this point the spam isn't debilitating.

Josh
--
A common mistake that people make when trying to design something
completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete
fools.
       -Douglas Adams

2005\03\21@052025 by Joe McCauley

picon face
Not to play down James' MAJOR part in keeping the list up and running, but
was the PICLIST not started by Jory Bell in the early ninties?

Joe (subscribed for more years than I care to remember.....)

{Original Message removed}

2005\03\21@060526 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
> Not to play down James' MAJOR part in keeping the list up and
> running, but
> was the PICLIST not started by Jory Bell in the early ninties?
>
> Joe (subscribed for more years than I care to remember.....)

It was. But you'll notice that some while ago James went from calling
himself admin and invoking the mysterious and never present Jory to
calling himself "list owner". I assume some probably unannounced
transaction occurred somewhere. I imagine that ever since then Jory's
friends haven't been able to work out why he has such a spring in his
step and a joy for life and a far more carefree demeanour than he had
had for years.

31 August 2004 Dan said (possibly by mistake)

* pic microcontroller discussion list
* Owner=  TakeThisOuTjoryspamspammit.edu
* Owner=  jamesnewtonEraseMEspampiclist.com
* Owner=  RemoveMEjoshybearEraseMEspamspam_OUTgmail.com
* Owner=  @spam@piclist_errorsRemoveMEspamEraseMEsympatico.ca
* Owner=  EraseMEgaloophspam@spam@gmail.com
...

Jory got mentioned by James on 30 July 2003 in an appeal for support.


RM

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2005 , 2006 only
- Today
- New search...